Delgado 2007.
Methods | Title: tooth‐whitening efficacy of custom tray‐delivered 9% hydrogen peroxide and 20% carbamide peroxide during daytime use: a 14‐day clinical trial Trial design: double‐blinded, randomised controlled clinical trial Location: University of Puerto Rico Language: English Number of centres: 1 Recruitment period: not reported Funding source: Colgate |
|
Participants | Participants: 25 to 64 years of age Total number: 46 Inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria:
Number randomised: 46 Method of randomisation: random list Method of allocation concealment: not reported Method of blinding: not reported Number evaluated: 37 |
|
Interventions | Total number of intervention groups: 2 Group I: Colgate Visible White containing 9% hydrogen peroxide (9% HP) Group II: Opalescence containing 20% carbamide peroxide (20% CP) Duration of treatment: 30 minutes for 2 weeks |
|
Outcomes | Improvement in tooth shade The shade guide tabs were arranged B1 to C4 representing the 1 to 16 scale |
|
Notes | Sample size calculation: not reported Adverse effects: gingival irritation Health‐related quality of life: not reported Key conclusions of the study authors: "Both 9% hydrogen peroxide and 20% carbamide peroxide products effectively whitened teeth after 5, 7 and 14 days of once‐a day 30‐minute applications. 9% hydrogen peroxide produced a statistically significant tooth shade improvement compared to the tooth whitening effect of 20% carbamide peroxide after 5 days of product use. Colgate Visible White 9% hydrogen peroxide and Opalescence (20% carbamide peroxide) had a similar whitening effect after 7 and 14 days of use. Both tooth whitening products tested produced little tooth sensitivity or gingival irritation" Contact: Evaristo Delgado; edelgadoc@yahoo.com |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Participants were assigned following a random list to 1 of the 2 treatment groups" |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not mentioned |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Quote: "randomised, single‐centre, parallel‐group, double‐blinded clinical trial." However, method is not reported |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Quote: "randomised, single‐centre, parallel‐group, double‐blinded clinical trial." However, method is not reported |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Quote: "9 dropouts noted" Comment: 7 failed to keep up with study visits. Unbalanced number in both groups (20% CP: n=16 and 9% HP: n = 21). We are not sure if plausible effect size (difference in means ) among missing outcomes may have a clinically relevant impact on observed effect size |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All outcomes described were reported. Conclusions are in accordance with the results |
Other bias | Low risk | None |