A randomised bite force study assessing two currently marketed denture adhesive products compared with no‐adhesive control

dc.contributor.authorVarghese, Roshan
dc.contributor.authorBurnett, Gary R.
dc.contributor.authorSouverain, Audrey
dc.contributor.authorPatil, Avinash
dc.contributor.authorGossweiler, Ana G.
dc.contributor.departmentCariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public Health, School of Dentistryen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-24T16:26:57Z
dc.date.available2020-07-24T16:26:57Z
dc.date.issued2019-06
dc.description.abstractUnlike other oral care products, there are limited technologies in the denture adhesive category with the majority based on polymethyl vinyl ether/maleic anhydride (PVM/MA) polymer. Carbomer‐based denture adhesives are less well studied, and there are few clinical studies directly comparing performance of denture adhesives based on different technologies. This single‐centre, randomised, three‐treatment, three‐period, examiner‐blind, crossover study compared a carbomer‐based denture adhesive (Test adhesive) with a PVM/MA‐based adhesive (Reference adhesive) and no adhesive using incisal bite force measurements (area over baseline over 12 hr; AOB0–12) in participants with a well‐made and at least moderately well‐fitting complete maxillary denture. Eligible participants were randomised to a treatment sequence and bit on a force transducer with increasing force until their maxillary denture dislodged. This procedure was performed prior to treatment application (baseline) and at 0.5, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 hr following application. Forty‐four participants were included in the modified intent‐to‐treat population. AOB0–12 favoured both Test adhesive to No adhesive (difference: 2.12 lbs; 95% CI [1.25, 3.00]; p < 0.0001) and Reference adhesive to No adhesive (difference: 2.76 lbs; 95% CI [1.89, 3.63]; p < 0.0001). There was a numerical difference in AOB0–12 for Test versus Reference adhesive (−0.63 lbs; [−1.51, 0.25]); however, this was not statistically significant (p = 0.1555). Treatments were generally well tolerated. Both PVM/MA and carbomer‐based denture adhesives demonstrated statistically significantly superior denture retention compared with no adhesive over 12 hr, with no statistically significant difference between adhesives.en_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.identifier.citationVarghese, R., Burnett, G. R., Souverain, A., Patil, A., & Gossweiler, A. G. (2019). A randomised bite force study assessing two currently marketed denture adhesive products compared with no-adhesive control. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research, 5(3), 276–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.182en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/23368
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1002/cre2.182en_US
dc.relation.journalClinical and Experimental Dental Researchen_US
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.sourcePublisheren_US
dc.subjectadhesivesen_US
dc.subjectbite forceen_US
dc.subjectdenturesen_US
dc.titleA randomised bite force study assessing two currently marketed denture adhesive products compared with no‐adhesive controlen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Varghese2019Randomised.pdf
Size:
668.64 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: