Available online 22 November 2018
To assess if low-level laser therapy (LLLT) alleviate pain after the placement of orthodontic alignment arch-wire and if there could be a specific indication for the usage of LLLT according to the amount of dental crowding.
Materials and Methods
Ninety subjects were included and randomly assigned to tested group (orthodontic treatment and LLLT), placebo group (orthodontic treatment and simulated LLLT) and control group (orthodontic treatment only). Inclusion criteria: age between 13 and 30 years, completely erupted mandibular teeth, lower crowding ≥ 3 mm. Exclusion criteria: spaces/diastema in the lower arch, ectopic teeth, treatment plan including extractions or the use of auxiliary devices, previous orthodontic treatment. Patients reported the pain experienced by using a numeric rating scale (NRS), raging from 0 to 10, at specific time intervals i.e., 2 hours, 6 hours, 24 hours and from day 2 to 7. Kruskal-Wallis H Test was used to assess differences 1) in the maximum pain and in the pain experienced at each time interval among the three groups and 2) in the maximum pain reported among subjects with different degree of crowding.
The final sample consisted of 84 patients, 41 male and 43 female, with a mean age of 16,5 ± 2,8 years. The pain experienced at each time interval and the maximum pain score were significantly lower in the tested group, while no differences were found between control and placebo groups. Moreover, no differences were found in the pain experienced among subjects with mild, moderate and severe incisors crowding in all groups.
LLLT is effective in alleviating the intensity and duration of pain experienced by patients after the engagement of alignment arch-wire. However, there is no specific indication for the usage of LLLT according to the amount of crowding.
Advanced Fluoride Formula for Superior Whole Mouth Health
New York, NY (November 26, 2018) – Colgate® is excited to introduce the Next Generation of Colgate Total®. New Colgate Total®SF contains a new Stannous Fluoride formula stabilized with Zinc Phosphate that fights plaque-causing bacteria on 100% of mouth surfaces*1 including teeth, tongue, cheeks, and gums, providing the ideal preventive solution for whole mouth health.
Colgate Total®SFeffectively fights harmful bacteria while protecting against bacterial repopulation, significantly reducing the overall bacterial load while creating a protective barrier that helps shield against attachment and regrowth. In development for more than a decade, the unique formula of new Colgate Total®SF is the subject of 28 granted patents and 95 pending patent applications.
Offering comprehensive benefits for the whole mouth, the new advanced formula found in new Colgate Total®SF addresses all indications of the original Colgate Total® including plaque, gingivitis, caries, stain removal/whitening, and calculus. Yet new Colgate Total®SF delivers even more benefits than ever before to help patients achieve superior whole mouth health.
Specifically, ongoing clinical testing of new Colgate Total®SF shows superior reductions vs. ordinary non-antibacterial toothpaste in:
What’s more, Colgate Total®SFnow provides additional new benefits:
✓ Sensitivity relief
✓ Enhanced enamel strength
✓ Odor neutralization
“The advanced fluoride formula of Colgate Total®SF offers significant advantages versus ordinaryfluoride toothpaste, and still retains all of the benefits that dental professionals already love about our original Colgate Total,” remarked Dr. Barbara Shearer, Director of Scientific Affairs for Colgate. “Our advanced fluoride formula provides multiple benefits for the whole mouth. These attractive features combined with a great taste make Colgate Total®SF a great tool to empower dental professionals and patients striving to achieve whole mouth heath.”
*Statistically significant greater reduction of cultivable bacteria in saliva and on tongue, teeth, cheeks, and gums with new Colgate TotalSF vs non-antibacterial fluoride toothpaste after 8weeks, 12 hours after brushing.
Reference: 1. Colgate Clinical Report 20180316BAC
Colgate-Palmolive is a leading global consumer products company, tightly focused on Oral Care, Personal Care, Home Care, and Pet Nutrition. Colgate sells its products in over 200 countries and territories around the world under such internationally recognized brand names as Colgate, Palmolive, Mennen, Softsoap, Irish Spring, Protex, Sorriso, Kolynos, elmex, Tom’s of Maine, Sanex, Ajax, Axion, Soupline, and Suavitel, as well as Hill’s Science Diet and Hill’s Prescription Diet. For more information about Colgate’s global business, visit the Company’s website at www.colgatepalmolive.com. To learn more about Colgate Bright Smiles, Bright Futures®, Colgate’s global oral health education program, please visit www.colgatebsbf.com.
Care-based communication in dental hygiene doesn’t happen naturally—you have to consciously incorporate it in your practice—but it can come to feel quite natural. Here’s what you need to know, and some specific strategies to try.
Available online 23 November 2018
The study was presented as an oral presentation during the 47th Meeting of the International Association for Dental Research Continental European Division held during 15-17 October 2015 in Antalya, Turkey.
Statement of problem
A good color match combined with a proper translucency match results in excellent esthetics for a metal-free restoration, yet basic color and translucency comparisons between available zirconia systems are not well described.
The purpose of this in vitro
study was to compare the color and translucency of commercially available zirconia materials.
Material and methods
Eight specimen disks were formed in each of the single-layer (0.5-mm thick) groups and double-layer (0.5-mm zirconia with 1.0-mm porcelain) groups for each of 5 zirconia-based substructure systems. Colors on black, gray, and white backings were used to obtain CIEDE2000 color differences between the zirconia systems in the layering groups and to obtain relative translucency parameter (RTP) values. Color differences were compared with perceptibility and acceptability thresholds, and comparisons in RTP were made using analyses of variance and the Bonferroni corrected Student t tests (α=.05).
The Shrout-Fleiss random set reliability for the duplicate L* determinations was 0.9992, 0.9756 for a*, and 0.9959 for b*. Although some mean color differences were below or at the perceptibility threshold, most differences were at or above the acceptability threshold. For the single-layer configuration, 1 material system had higher RTP values than every other material (P<.001), and another material had lower RTP values than every other material (P<.001).
The results of this study present significant differences in both color and translucency among 5 ceramic substrate systems when studied in single layers. Perceivable and often unacceptable differences in color were also found among these materials when layered with porcelain. It is concluded that the esthetics of restorations which use a ceramic substrate is notably affected by the ceramic system used.
The study was supported by Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of Cukurova University, project number DHF2012D9.
This article is part of the PhD dissertation project of Dr E.F.K., conducted under the supervision of Dr Y.U. to fulfill the criteria required by the Institute of Medical Sciences.
Our dental patients can inspire us to see the world differently. Amber Auger, RDH, shares her experiences here.