Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Home | About JISP | Search | Accepted articles | Online Early | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | SubmissionSubscribeLogin 
Users Online: 1669  Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font sizeWide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 24  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 441-446

A comparative evaluation of propolis and light-cured ormocer-based desensitizer in reducing dentin hypersensitivity

Department of Periodontology, JSS Dental College and Hospital, Mysuru, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Snigdha Maity
Department of Periodontology, JSS Dental College and Hospital, Bannimantap, Mysuru - 570 015, Karnataka
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jisp.jisp_500_19

Rights and Permissions

Objectives: The purpose of the study was to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and the durability of propolis and Light-cured ormocer-based desensitizer (Admira Protect, Voco: Cuxhaven Germany) in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity (DH). Materials and Methods: The study was conducted over a period of 2 months on 13 patients with 72 hypersensitive teeth, randomly allocated into three treatment groups: Group A: Treated with Propolis, Group B: Admira protect (Voco: Cuxhaven Germany), and Group C: Sterile water (Placebo control). Baseline sensitivity was recorded by the operator using tactile and evaporative stimuli. Visual analog scale (VAS) was used to record the degree of sensitivity perceived by the patients. All the groups received applications of allotted materials on day 1, 7, 14, and 21. After each applications VAS scoring was recorded. On day 30 and 60, only pain evaluation was done to determine the durability of each test materials. Statistical Analysis: One-way ANOVA, repeated measure ANOVA and post hoc test was done for multiple comparison. Results: All the groups showed significant results in reducing DH. Among Groups A and B, Group B showed immediate postoperative result at the end of the 1st week. Conclusion: Both the test materials were effective in reducing DH but Admira protect was found to be more efficient in reducing pain with longer duration of action (CTRI regd no: CTRI/2017/12/010755).

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded109    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal