Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01563172

Effect of Dentifrice Usage Regime on Delivery and Efficacy of Fluoride

This study will evaluate and compare the effect of the amount of toothpaste used and brushing time on enamel strengthening (percent of surface microhardness recovery, % SMHR) and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU).

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Dental Caries Stomatognathic Diseases Tooth Demineralization Tooth Diseases

Age range

18 year–80 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 4

Primary location

Indiana University School of Dentistry

Indianapolis, Indiana, 46202, United States

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

General and Dental Health

  • Good general and dental health with (in the opinion of the investigator) no clinically significant and relevant abnormalities of medical history or oral examination
  • Have no current active caries or periodontal disease that may compromise the study or the health of the subjects
  • Residency: Currently living in the Indianapolis, Indiana area

Dentures:

  • Currently wearing a removable mandibular partial denture with sufficient room in the posterior buccal flange area to accommodate two enamel specimens (required dimensions 12 mm x 7 mm)
  • Willing to have their denture modified to accommodate enamel test specimens and willing and capable of wearing their removable mandibular partial dentures 24 hours per day during the experimental periods
  • All restorations in a good state of repair
  • Salivary Flow: Have a salivary flow rate in the range of normal values (unstimulated whole saliva flow rate ≥ 0.2 mL/minute; gum base stimulated whole saliva flow rate ≥ 0.8 mL/minute)

Exclusion criteria

  • Antibiotics: Use of antibiotics two weeks prior to a treatment visit or anticipated use during the study treatment periods
  • Study Scale Use: Subjects unable to measure product weights accurately using the assigned study scale as determined by the study staff (as demonstrated on or before Visit 4)
  • A member of the site study staff who is directly working on the project or living in that staff's household
  • Any employee of any toothpaste manufacturer or their spouse or family member

Treatment and study plan

Sodium fluoride / silica and carbopol, 0.5g

Drug

Dentifrice containing 1150 parts per million (ppm) fluoride as sodium fluoride / silica and 0.4% carbopol

Sodium fluoride / silica and carbopol, 1.5g

Drug

Dentifrice containing 1150 ppm fluoride as sodium fluoride / silica and 0.4% carbopol

Fluoride free dentifrice

Other

A non fluoride dentifrice was given to participants of each arm at washout period

Primary outcomes

  1. Percentage Surface Micro Hardness Recovery (% SMH), of Brushing for 2 Minutes Versus (vs.) Brushing for 45 Seconds With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Baseline and at Day 14

    SMH recovery test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH recovery was performed in-vitro and determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents re-hardening of enamel surface. % SMH recovery was calculated from indentation length (micrometer [μm]) of sound enamel specimen at baseline (B), indentation length (μm) after in vitro demineralization (D1), indentation length (μm) after intra-oral exposure (R): [D1-R/D1-B] ×100.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage Surface Micro Hardness (% SMH) Recovery , of Brushing for 2 Minutes vs. Brushing for 45 Seconds With 0.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Baseline and at Day 14

    SMH recovery test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH recovery was performed in-vitro and determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents re-hardening of enamel surface. % SMH recovery was calculated from indentation length (μm) of sound enamel specimen at baseline (B), indentation length (μm) after in vitro demineralization (D1), indentation length (μm) after intra-oral exposure (R): [D1-R/D1-B] ×100.

  2. Percentage Surface Micro Hardness (% SMH) Recovery, of Brushing for 2 Minutes With 0.5g of Experimental Dentifrice vs. Brushing for 2 Minutes With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Baseline and at Day 14

    SMH recovery test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH recovery was performed in-vitro and determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents re-hardening of enamel surface. % SMH recovery was calculated from indentation length (μm) of sound enamel specimen at baseline (B), indentation length (μm) after in vitro demineralization (D1), indentation length (μm) after intra-oral exposure (R): [D1-R/D1-B] ×100.

  3. Percentage Surface Micro-hardness Recovery (% SMH), of Brushing for 45 Seconds With 0.5g of Experimental Dentifrice vs. Brushing for 45 Seconds With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Baseline and at Day 14

    SMH recovery test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH recovery was performed in-vitro and determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents re-hardening of enamel surface. % SMH recovery was calculated from indentation length (μm) of sound enamel specimen at baseline (B), indentation length (μm) after in vitro demineralization (D1), indentation length (μm) after intra-oral exposure (R): [D1-R/D1-B] ×100.

  4. Percent Surface Micro-hardness (% SMH) Recovery, of Brushing for 2 Minutes With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice vs. Brushing for 2 Minutes With 1.5g of an Control Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Baseline and at Day 14

    SMH recovery test was used to assess the changes in mineralization status of enamel specimens using a Wilson 2100 Hardness tester. SMH recovery was performed in-vitro and determined by measuring the length of the indentations of enamel specimens. An increase in the indentation length compared to the baseline indicates softening while decrease in the indentation length represents re-hardening of enamel surface. % SMH recovery was calculated from indentation length (μm) of sound enamel specimen at baseline (B), indentation length (μm) after in vitro demineralization (D1), indentation length (μm) after intra-oral exposure (R): [D1-R/D1-B] ×100.

  5. Enamel Fluoride Uptake (EFU) After Brushing for 2 Minutes vs. Brushing for 45 Seconds With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Day 14

    EFU was measured by using micro-drill analysis of the enamel specimens carried out after 14 days of intra-oral exposure for each of the toothpaste treatments. The amount of fluoride-uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride divided by the area of the enamel cores.

  6. Enamel Fluoride Uptake (EFU) After Brushing for 2 Minutes vs. Brushing for 45 Seconds With 0.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Day 14

    EFU was measured by using micro-drill analysis of the enamel specimens carried out after 14 days of intra-oral exposure for each of the toothpaste treatments. The amount of fluoride-uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride divided by the area of the enamel cores.

  7. Enamel Fluoride Uptake (EFU) After Brushing for 2 Minutes With 0.5g of Experimental Dentifrice vs. Brushing for 2 Minutes With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Day 14

    EFU was measured by using micro-drill analysis of the enamel specimens carried out after 14 days of intra-oral exposure for each of the toothpaste treatments. The amount of fluoride-uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride divided by the area of the enamel cores.

  8. Enamel Fluoride Uptake (EFU) After Brushing for 45 Seconds With 0.5g of Experimental Dentifrice vs. Brushing for 45 Seconds With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Day 14

    EFU was measured by using micro-drill analysis of the enamel specimens carried out after 14 days of intra-oral exposure for each of the toothpaste treatments. The amount of fluoride-uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride divided by the area of the enamel cores.

  9. Enamel Fluoride Uptake (EFU) After Brushing for 2 Minutes With 1.5g of Experimental Dentifrice vs. Brushing for 2 Minutes With 1.5g of Control Dentifrice.

    Time frame: At Day 14

    EFU was measured by using micro-drill analysis of the enamel specimens carried out after 14 days of intra-oral exposure for each of the toothpaste treatments. The amount of fluoride-uptake by enamel was calculated based on the amount of fluoride divided by the area of the enamel cores.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

GlaxoSmithKline

Industry

Registry information

Official study title

A Study to Measure the Effect of Dentifrice Usage Regime on Delivery and Efficacy of Fluoride Using an In Situ Caries Model

Important dates

Study start
2009
Primary completion
2009
Study completion
2009
First posted
Mar 26, 2012
Registry last updated
Feb 7, 2018

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.