Faculty Bibliography

The purpose of this three-month, double-blind, parallel-design clinical study was to compare the efficacy of two commercially available dentifrices, Herbal Toothpaste and Gum Therapy and Colgate Total, in controlling gingivitis, gingival bleeding, plaque and stain. Forty healthy adult volunteers from the Junior Comprehensive Care Clinics at New York University College of Dentistry were accepted as subjects for this clinical trial. To be eligible for a baseline clinical examination, subjects had to first indicate that during the previous six months they habitually brushed their teeth two or more times per day, and had noticed 'bleeding gums' or 'blood in the toothpaste' after brushing or flossing their teeth. At the baseline examination, subjects were enrolled in the study if they had at least five Loe-Silness gingival bleeding sites and 20 natural teeth, including all anterior teeth and four molars. An independent t-test before treatment indicated that there were no significant differences between the two groups at baseline. A one-way Analysis of Variance indicated that both dentifrices had a significant effect on gingivitis, gingival bleeding, plaque, and dental stain (p < 0.05). No significant statistical differences were observed between Herbal Toothpaste and Gum Therapy and Colgate Total for gingivitis or gingival bleeding. Herbal Toothpaste and Gum Therapy produced statistically significant differences in reducing plaque and stain relative to Colgate Total (p < 0.05). The results obtained in this study support the clinical efficacy of both products in reducing gingivitis and plaque, and demonstrate the efficacy of Herbal Toothpaste and Gum Therapy in maintaining reductions of plaque and stain

Electronic anesthesia is an effective adjunct for the management of dental pain, and has been used in medicine and dentistry for several decades. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of dental electronic anesthesia while preparing teeth for large restorations and full crown coverage. The single-blind study involved the use of two identical units (Cedeta Mk3). One was a fully operational, commercially available unit (active unit), while the other had been modified to prevent current from reaching the electrodes (control unit). Both the non-working control device and the active unit had a normally functioning indicator light that glowed when the unit was turned on. The study participants consisted of 100 patients selected from the roster at New York University College of Dentistry. Subjects were selected if (1) their prescribed treatment plans required large class I, II, III, IV, or V restorations or full coverage crowns, (2) they had previous treatment performed with the use of an injectable local anesthetic, and (3) their medical history showed a lack of medical contraindications. The active unit group had 31 subjects with large restorations required, 5 patients needing inlay/onlay preparations and 14 subjects requiring full coverage. The control unit group had 43 subjects needing large operative restorations, 1 onlay and 6 subjects needing full coverage. Each subject was informed that he/she would be able to eliminate the pain from the dental procedure by maintaining control of the electronic dental anesthesia unit (reaching a therapeutic level). If unmanageable discomfort occurred, intraligamentous local anesthesia would be administered. Two of the 50 subjects who received the control device were able to tolerate the dental procedure, the rest were given the rescue anesthetic upon request. Forty-three of the 50 subjects who received the active unit responded with an excellent or very good evaluation for pain control, with no rescue anesthetic required. Seventy-four dental procedures were performed on the 50 subjects who received the active unit. Forty-five of the subjects in the active unit group said they would prefer to have electronic anesthesia for their next dental treatment, rather than the novocaine they had previously experienced. Forty-eight of the subjects in the control unit group said that they would prefer the traditional novocaine injection for their next dental treatment