Background: Patients may be inadvertently harmed while undergoing dental treatments. To improve care, we must first determine the types and frequency of harms that patients experience, but identifying cases of harm is not always straightforward for dental practices. Mining data from electronic health records is a promising means of efficiently detecting possible adverse events (AEs).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: This study compared the whitening efficacy, side effects, and patients' preferences/perceptions of two whitening systems of similar peroxide concentration but different formulation and delivery methods.
Methods: The tooth color change of 24 participants was measured using a shade guide (BSG) and a spectrophotometer (ES). Color difference was calculated: ΔE* = [(ΔL*)(2) + (Δa*)(2) + (Δb*)(2)](1/2).
Objective: This study evaluated the time necessary for at-home whitening (HW) to match the results of an in-office (OW) treatment, side effects and patients' preferences/perceptions.
Methods: The tooth color change of 20 subjects was measured using a shade guide (BSG) and spectrophotometer (ES). Color difference was calculated: delta E* = [(delta L*)2 + (delta a*ab)2 + (delta b*ab)2]1/2.
Purpose: This study compared the flowability of various commercial dental composites to flowable composites in response to warming in a composite warmer.
Methods: 18 conventional resin composites and four flowable composites were tested at room temperature (23 degrees C), and the conventional composites were tested after pre-heating in a Calset unit (Addent) to 54 degrees C or 68 degrees C. Flowability was determined by placing uncured composite onto plastic sheets and loading for 180 seconds (4 kg load) while maintained at 36 degrees C (conditioning temperature [n=3]) to simulate placing room temperature composite into a tooth.