Questa pagina è stata tradotta automaticamente e l'accuratezza della traduzione non è garantita. Si prega di fare riferimento al Versione inglese per un testo di partenza.

Guided Biofilm Therapy Versus Conventional Polishing for Tooth Re-Staining

28 agosto 2026 aggiornato da: 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.

Panoramica dello studio

Stato

Completato

Condizioni

Intervento / Trattamento

Descrizione dettagliata

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 di studio

Interventistico

Iscrizione (Effettivo)

34

Fase

  • Non applicabile

Contatti e Sedi

Questa sezione fornisce i recapiti di coloro che conducono lo studio e informazioni su dove viene condotto lo studio.

Luoghi di studio

  • Turchia (Türkiye)
    • Erzurum
      • Erzurum, Erzurum, Turchia (Türkiye), 25080
        • Ataturk University

Criteri di partecipazione

I ricercatori cercano persone che corrispondano a una certa descrizione, chiamata criteri di ammissibilità. Alcuni esempi di questi criteri sono le condizioni generali di salute di una persona o trattamenti precedenti.

Criteri di ammissibilità

Età idonea allo studio

  • Adulto
  • Adulto più anziano

Accetta volontari sani

Sì

Descrizione

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.

Piano di studio

Questa sezione fornisce i dettagli del piano di studio, compreso il modo in cui lo studio è progettato e ciò che lo studio sta misurando.

Come è strutturato lo studio?

Dettagli di progettazione

  • Scopo principale: Prevenzione
  • Assegnazione: Randomizzato
  • Modello interventistico: Assegnazione incrociata
  • Mascheramento: Separare

Armi e interventi

Gruppo di partecipanti / Arm
Intervento / Trattamento
Sperimentale: 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.
Procedura: 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.
Altri nomi:
  • GBT
Procedura: 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.
Altri nomi:
  • CONV
Sperimentale: 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.
Procedura: 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.
Altri nomi:
  • GBT
Procedura: 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.
Altri nomi:
  • CONV

Cosa sta misurando lo studio?

Misure di risultato primarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Change in Tooth Color From Immediately After Treatment to 2 Months Assessed by CIELAB ΔE*ab Using a SpectroShade Micro Spectrophotometer
Lasso di tempo: 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

Misure di risultato secondarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Change in Tooth Color From Immediately After Treatment to 1 Month Assessed by CIELAB ΔE*ab Using a SpectroShade Micro Spectrophotometer
Lasso di tempo: 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
Lasso di tempo: 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
Lasso di tempo: 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
Lasso di tempo: 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

Collaboratori e investigatori

Qui è dove troverai le persone e le organizzazioni coinvolte in questo studio.

Sponsor

Ataturk University

Investigatori

  • Direttore dello studio: Recep Orbak, DDS, PhD, Ataturk University

Studiare le date dei record

Queste date tengono traccia dell'avanzamento della registrazione dello studio e dell'invio dei risultati di sintesi a ClinicalTrials.gov. I record degli studi e i risultati riportati vengono esaminati dalla National Library of Medicine (NLM) per assicurarsi che soddisfino specifici standard di controllo della qualità prima di essere pubblicati sul sito Web pubblico.

Studia le date principali

Inizio studio (Effettivo)

5 gennaio 2026

Completamento primario (Effettivo)

1 giugno 2026

Completamento dello studio (Effettivo)

8 giugno 2026

Date di iscrizione allo studio

Primo inviato

18 agosto 2026

Primo inviato che soddisfa i criteri di controllo qualità

28 agosto 2026

Primo Inserito (Effettivo)

2 settembre 2026

Aggiornamenti dei record di studio

Ultimo aggiornamento pubblicato (Effettivo)

2 settembre 2026

Ultimo aggiornamento inviato che soddisfa i criteri QC

28 agosto 2026

Ultimo verificato

1 agosto 2026

Maggiori informazioni

Termini relativi a questo studio

Parole chiave

Termini MeSH pertinenti aggiuntivi

Altri numeri di identificazione dello studio

  • 926

Piano per i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)

Hai intenzione di condividere i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)?

SÌ

Descrizione del piano 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.

Periodo di condivisione IPD

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

Criteri di accesso alla condivisione 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 di informazioni di supporto alla condivisione IPD

  • STUDIO_PROTOCOLLO

Informazioni su farmaci e dispositivi, documenti di studio

Studia un prodotto farmaceutico regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

Studia un dispositivo regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

prodotto fabbricato ed esportato dagli Stati Uniti

No

Queste informazioni sono state recuperate direttamente dal sito web clinicaltrials.gov senza alcuna modifica. In caso di richieste di modifica, rimozione o aggiornamento dei dettagli dello studio, contattare register@clinicaltrials.gov. Non appena verrà implementata una modifica su clinicaltrials.gov, questa verrà aggiornata automaticamente anche sul nostro sito web .

Sottoscrivi