Esta página se tradujo automáticamente y no se garantiza la precisión de la traducción. por favor refiérase a versión inglesa para un texto fuente.

Guided Biofilm Therapy Versus Conventional Polishing for Tooth Re-Staining

28 de agosto de 2026 actualizado por: Mehmet Ali Tuna, Ataturk University

Guided Biofilm Therapy Versus Conventional Polishing for Extrinsic Tooth Re-Staining, Patient Comfort, and Procedure Time: A Randomized Split-Mouth Trial

This study compared Guided Biofilm Therapy with conventional polishing in adults with visible extrinsic tooth staining. Each participant received Guided Biofilm Therapy on one side of the mouth and conventional polishing on the other side.

The study evaluated whether the two methods differed in the amount of tooth re-staining after treatment, patient discomfort during the procedures, and total procedure time. Tooth color was measured with a spectrophotometer immediately after treatment, at 1 month, and at 2 months. Patient discomfort was recorded using a visual analog scale, and procedure time was measured with a stopwatch.

A total of 34 participants completed the study.

Descripción general del estudio

Estado

Terminado

Condiciones

Intervención / Tratamiento

Descripción detallada

This randomized split-mouth clinical trial was conducted in adults with visible extrinsic tooth staining. The aim was to compare Guided Biofilm Therapy (GBT) with conventional polishing in terms of post-procedural extrinsic tooth re-staining, patient discomfort, and procedure time.

Each participant received both interventions. One side of the mouth was assigned to GBT and the contralateral side to conventional polishing. The right-left allocation of the interventions was determined by randomization, with the two allocation sequences equally distributed among participants.

In the GBT intervention, dental biofilm was first disclosed and then removed using an air-water-powder system with a low-abrasive erythritol-based powder. Supragingival ultrasonic instrumentation was performed where necessary. In the conventional polishing intervention, supragingival instrumentation was followed by mechanical polishing with a brush and polishing paste.

Tooth color was assessed using a SpectroShade Micro spectrophotometer and the CIELAB color system. Measurements were performed immediately after treatment at baseline (T0), at 1 month (T1), and at 2 months (T2). Color change between assessment periods was calculated using ΔE*ab values.

Patient-reported discomfort was assessed immediately after each half-mouth procedure using a visual analog scale. Total procedure time for each intervention was recorded with a stopwatch.

The primary outcome was color change from immediately after treatment to 2 months. Secondary outcomes included color change from immediately after treatment to 1 month, color change from 1 month to 2 months, patient discomfort, and procedure time.

A total of 34 participants completed all study visits and follow-up assessments.

Tipo de estudio

Intervencionista

Inscripción (Actual)

34

Fase

  • No aplica

Contactos y Ubicaciones

Esta sección proporciona los datos de contacto de quienes realizan el estudio e información sobre dónde se lleva a cabo este estudio.

Ubicaciones de estudio

Criterios de participación

Los investigadores buscan personas que se ajusten a una determinada descripción, denominada criterio de elegibilidad. Algunos ejemplos de estos criterios son el estado de salud general de una persona o tratamientos previos.

Criterio de elegibilidad

Edades elegibles para estudiar

  • Adulto
  • Adulto Mayor

Acepta Voluntarios Saludables

Sí

Descripción

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age over 18 years.
  • Willingness to participate in the study and provision of written informed consent.
  • Good general health with no systemic disease.
  • Clinical presence of extrinsic staining on tooth surfaces at a level warranting professional polishing.
  • Right-handed tooth brushing.
  • No professional dental cleaning within the previous 6 months.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age under 18 years.
  • Diagnosis of periodontitis.
  • Current smoking.
  • Antibiotic use within the previous 3 months.
  • Presence of acute periodontal disease.
  • Allergy to polishing powders, specifically erythritol.
  • Presence of a communicable disease.
  • Teeth to be measured with restorations, caries, excessive wear, or structural defects that could affect measurement.
  • Active orthodontic treatment.
  • Developmental or structural anomalies affecting enamel and potentially increasing susceptibility to extrinsic staining, including hypomineralization, amelogenesis imperfecta, or dentinogenesis imperfecta.
  • Severe dental crowding preventing standardized measurements.

Plan de estudios

Esta sección proporciona detalles del plan de estudio, incluido cómo está diseñado el estudio y qué mide el estudio.

¿Cómo está diseñado el estudio?

Detalles de diseño

  • Propósito principal: Prevención
  • Asignación: Aleatorizado
  • Modelo Intervencionista: Asignación cruzada
  • Enmascaramiento: Único

Armas e Intervenciones

Grupo de participantes/brazo
Intervención / Tratamiento
Experimental: Sequence A: Right GBT / Left Conventional Polishing
Participants assigned to Sequence A received Guided Biofilm Therapy on the right half of the mouth and conventional polishing on the left half of the mouth. Both interventions were performed within the split-mouth study design.
Procedimiento: Guided Biofilm Therapy
Dental biofilm was first disclosed to guide treatment. Supragingival biofilm and extrinsic staining were then removed using an air-water-powder system with a low-abrasive erythritol-based powder. Supragingival ultrasonic instrumentation was performed where necessary, followed by final surface control.
Otros nombres:
  • GBT
Procedimiento: Conventional Polishing
Supragingival instrumentation was performed as needed, followed by mechanical polishing with a prophylaxis brush and polishing paste at 2500 to 3000 rpm. The procedure was completed with final surface control.
Otros nombres:
  • CONV
Experimental: Sequence B: Right Conventional Polishing / Left GBT
Participants assigned to Sequence B received conventional polishing on the right half of the mouth and Guided Biofilm Therapy on the left half of the mouth. Both interventions were performed within the split-mouth study design.
Procedimiento: Guided Biofilm Therapy
Dental biofilm was first disclosed to guide treatment. Supragingival biofilm and extrinsic staining were then removed using an air-water-powder system with a low-abrasive erythritol-based powder. Supragingival ultrasonic instrumentation was performed where necessary, followed by final surface control.
Otros nombres:
  • GBT
Procedimiento: Conventional Polishing
Supragingival instrumentation was performed as needed, followed by mechanical polishing with a prophylaxis brush and polishing paste at 2500 to 3000 rpm. The procedure was completed with final surface control.
Otros nombres:
  • CONV

¿Qué mide el estudio?

Medidas de resultado primarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Change in Tooth Color From Immediately After Treatment to 2 Months Assessed by CIELAB ΔE*ab Using a SpectroShade Micro Spectrophotometer
Periodo de tiempo: Immediately after treatment (Day 1) and at 2 months
Tooth color was measured using a SpectroShade Micro spectrophotometer according to the CIELAB color system. Color change between immediately after treatment (T0) and 2 months (T2) was calculated as ΔEab using the formula: ΔEab = [(ΔL*)² + (Δa*)² + (Δb*)²]^(1/2). ΔEab is a continuous color-difference measure, with 0 indicating no color difference and higher values indicating greater color change. Therefore, lower ΔEab values indicate greater color stability.
Immediately after treatment (Day 1) and at 2 months

Medidas de resultado secundarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Change in Tooth Color From Immediately After Treatment to 1 Month Assessed by CIELAB ΔE*ab Using a SpectroShade Micro Spectrophotometer
Periodo de tiempo: Immediately after treatment (Day 1) and at 1 month
Tooth color was measured using a SpectroShade Micro spectrophotometer according to the CIELAB color system. Color change between immediately after treatment (T0) and 1 month (T1) was calculated as ΔEab using the formula: ΔEab = [(ΔL*)² + (Δa*)² + (Δb*)²]^(1/2). ΔEab is a continuous color-difference measure, with 0 indicating no color difference and higher values indicating greater color change. Therefore, lower ΔEab values indicate greater color stability.
Immediately after treatment (Day 1) and at 1 month
Change in Tooth Color From 1 Month to 2 Months
Periodo de tiempo: At 1 month and 2 months
Tooth color was measured using a SpectroShade Micro spectrophotometer according to the CIELAB color system. Color change between 1 month (M1) and 2 months (M2) was calculated as ΔE*ab using the formula: ΔE*ab = [(ΔL*)² + (Δa*)² + (Δb*)²]^(1/2). Lower ΔE*ab values indicate less color change.
At 1 month and 2 months
Patient-Reported Discomfort Assessed Using a 10-cm Visual Analog Scale
Periodo de tiempo: Immediately after completion of each half-mouth intervention (Day 1)
Patient-reported discomfort was assessed immediately after each half-mouth procedure using a 10-cm visual analog scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 indicated no discomfort and 10 indicated unbearable discomfort. The score reflected the overall perception of pain or sensitivity, heat, pressure or vibration, and discomfort related to water spray or aerosol. Lower scores indicate greater patient comfort.
Immediately after completion of each half-mouth intervention (Day 1)
Total Procedure Time Measured Using a Digital Stopwatch
Periodo de tiempo: Periprocedural
Total procedure time for each intervention was recorded using a digital stopwatch. Timing began with the first clinical step of the relevant intervention and ended after completion of the final surface check. Patient preparation, isolation, and oral hygiene instruction were excluded. Procedure time was recorded in minutes and seconds, with shorter times indicating greater procedural efficiency.
Periprocedural

Colaboradores e Investigadores

Aquí es donde encontrará personas y organizaciones involucradas en este estudio.

Patrocinador

Ataturk University

Investigadores

  • Director de estudio: Recep Orbak, DDS, PhD, Ataturk University

Fechas de registro del estudio

Estas fechas rastrean el progreso del registro del estudio y los envíos de resultados resumidos a ClinicalTrials.gov. Los registros del estudio y los resultados informados son revisados ​​por la Biblioteca Nacional de Medicina (NLM) para asegurarse de que cumplan con los estándares de control de calidad específicos antes de publicarlos en el sitio web público.

Fechas importantes del estudio

Inicio del estudio (Actual)

5 de enero de 2026

Finalización primaria (Actual)

1 de junio de 2026

Finalización del estudio (Actual)

8 de junio de 2026

Fechas de registro del estudio

Enviado por primera vez

18 de agosto de 2026

Primero enviado que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad

28 de agosto de 2026

Publicado por primera vez (Actual)

2 de septiembre de 2026

Actualizaciones de registros de estudio

Última actualización publicada (Actual)

2 de septiembre de 2026

Última actualización enviada que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad

28 de agosto de 2026

Última verificación

1 de agosto de 2026

Más información

Términos relacionados con este estudio

Palabras clave

Términos MeSH relevantes adicionales

Otros números de identificación del estudio

  • 926

Plan de datos de participantes individuales (IPD)

¿Planea compartir datos de participantes individuales (IPD)?

SÍ

Descripción del plan IPD

De-identified individual participant data underlying the results reported in the published article will be shared. These data may include participant-level demographic variables, treatment allocation, ΔE*ab color-change outcomes, visual analog scale scores, and procedure-time data necessary to reproduce the reported analyses.

Marco de tiempo para compartir IPD

Data and supporting information will be available beginning 6 months after publication of the study results and will remain available for 5 years.

Criterios de acceso compartido de IPD

Qualified researchers may request access from the corresponding author for scientifically justified research purposes. Requests should include a brief research proposal describing the purpose of the analysis and the data requested. Access will be considered following review of the proposed use and applicable ethical and confidentiality requirements. Only de-identified data relevant to the approved request will be shared electronically.

Tipo de información de apoyo para compartir IPD

  • PROTOCOLO DE ESTUDIO

Información sobre medicamentos y dispositivos, documentos del estudio

Estudia un producto farmacéutico regulado por la FDA de EE. UU.

No

Estudia un producto de dispositivo regulado por la FDA de EE. UU.

No

producto fabricado y exportado desde los EE. UU.

No

Esta información se obtuvo directamente del sitio web clinicaltrials.gov sin cambios. Si tiene alguna solicitud para cambiar, eliminar o actualizar los detalles de su estudio, comuníquese con register@clinicaltrials.gov. Tan pronto como se implemente un cambio en clinicaltrials.gov, también se actualizará automáticamente en nuestro sitio web. .

Suscribir