BackgroundOral diseases rank among the most prevalent non-communicable diseases in modern societies. In Germany, oral epidemiological data show that both dental caries and periodontal diseases are highly prevalent, though significant improvements in oral health has been taking in the population within the last decades, particularly in children. It is, therefore, the aim of the Fifth German Oral Health Study (DMS V) to actualize the data on current oral health status and to gather information on oral health behavior and risk factors. In addition to current oral health monitoring, the study will also permit conclusions about trends in the development of oral health in Germany between 1989 and 2014.Methods/DesignDMS V is a cross-sectional, multi-center, nationwide representative, socio-epidemiological study to investigate the oral health status und behavior of the German resident population in four age cohorts. Study participants are children (12-year-olds), adults (35- to 44-year-olds), young olds (65- to 74-year-olds), and old olds (75- to 100-year-olds) who are drawn from local residents’ registration offices. Social-science investigation parameters concern subjective perceptions and attitudes regarding oral health and nutrition, sense of coherence, and socio-demographic data. Clinical oral parameters are tooth loss, caries and periodontitis, prosthodontic status, further developmental and acquired dental hard tissue and mucosal lesions. To ensure reproducibility, the dental investigators are trained and calibrated by experts and multiple reliability checks are performed throughout the field phase. Statistical analyses are calculated according to a detailed statistical analysis plan.DiscussionThe DMS studies first performed in 1989, 1992 and repeated in 1997 and 2005 are the only cross-sectional oral health studies conducted in Germany on a population-based national representative level. Updated prevalence and trend analyses of key oral diseases are, therefore, of major epidemiological and health services research interest.Trial registrationGerman Health Services Research Data Bank VfD_DMSV_13_002152

SUMMARYObjective: The current study assessed the efficacy of three current bleaching methods.Methods: Seventy-five healthy subjects (45♀; 30♂) with anterior teeth, having a Vita Shade score of A2 or darker, participated in the study. The subjects were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: Group A: home-bleaching (Illumine Home, 10% carbamide peroxide, trays, overnight, for two weeks), Group B: inoffice bleaching (Illumine Office, 15% hydrogen peroxide, trays for 45 minutes, three times over three weeks), Group C: Whitestrips (strips, twice a day, 30 minutes each for two weeks).Following the screening visit, three weeks prior to the baseline examination, all subjects received a dental prophylaxis. Clinical RelevanceThe efficacy of vital bleaching depends on the two aspects-viz, bleaching agent and the bleaching method. Results from this in vivo study show that 10% carbamide peroxide home-bleaching and 15% hydrogen peroxide in-office bleaching were more effective than a 6% hydrogen peroxide home-bleaching over-the-counter product up to three months after completion of the bleaching treatment. M Bizhang • Y-HP Chun • K Damerau P Singh • WH-M Raab • S ZimmerThe color of the teeth was determined using a colorimeter (ShadeEye NCC) and a custom-made stent at baseline (E 0 ), immediately after completion of the bleaching (E 3 ) and three months after treatment (E 4 ). All subjects received oral hygiene instructions and a toothbrush and toothpaste for oral home care during the study period.The change of tooth color was determined for each treatment regimen between baseline and E 3 and baseline and E 4 and was statistically analyzed performing the Kruskal Wallis test and the Mann-Whitney-U test. The significance level was set at p<0.01.Results: The dropout rate was 0%. Mean (SD) ∆E* (overall color change) from baseline to immediately after treatment was 6.57 (2.13) for Group A, 5.77(1.72) for Group B and 3.58 (1.57) for Group C. The mean (SD) tooth color change from baseline to three months after treatment ∆E* was: 4.98(1.34) for Group A, 4.59 (1.42) for Group B and 2.99 (1.39) for Group C. Significant differences were found between home bleaching and Whitestrips, as well as between in-office bleaching and Whitestrips, but not between homebleaching and in-office bleaching during the same time.Conclusion: Using an objective color measurement device, home bleaching and in-office bleaching were found to be superior to Whitestrips. Home bleaching and in-office bleaching were equally efficient for bleaching teeth and maintaining the results for up to three months.

The aim of this study was to determine the antibacterial effectiveness of either chlorhexidine or calcium hydroxide integrated in gutta-percha points compared with chlorhexidine or calcium hydroxide delivered as gel or paste, respectively. A total of 70 initially sterile roots with open accesses were carried for 1 week in the oral cavities of two volunteers. The roots were then removed, and samples were taken from the root canals for microbial analysis. The roots were medicated with calcium hydroxide paste, 5% chlorhexidine gel, or a chlorhexidine- or calcium hydroxide-containing gutta-percha point. The accesses were closed with bonding material, and the roots incubated for 1 week. After removal of the antimicrobial agents, roots were again checked for bacterial growth. One thioglycolate-soaked paper point was then introduced into each canal, and roots were incubated for 1 week more to observe bacterial regrowth. After 1 week of medication, the absolute bacterial count revealed significant differences compared with the controls. However, only the chlorhexidine-gel and the calcium hydroxide paste group showed no microbial colonization in a considerable number of samples after 1 and 2 weeks.

Material & MethodsWe have analyzed the loss of enamel and dentine after exposure to different non-alcoholic drinks with a simple new method using bovine teeth. 100 enamel and 100 dentine specimens from freshly extracted bovine incisors were randomly attributed to 10 groups (n=10 for enamel and dentine each). Prior to the start of the experiment all specimens were weighed using a precision balance. The mean initial masses (SD) were 35.8 mg (7.2) for enamel and 24.7 mg (7.0) for dentine. No statistically significant differences were found between groups for initial masses (p>0.05, ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test). Thereafter, all specimens of one group were simultaneously placed in 200 ml of the following fluids: Coca-Cola, Coca-Cola light, Sprite, apple juice, Red Bull, orange juice, Bonaqua Fruits (Mango-Acai), tap water, chlorinated swimming pool water, and lemon juice. Fluids were continuously ventilated at 37° C for 7 days. Thereafter the specimens were weighed again and the mean mass loss was calculated.ResultsThe values were (enamel/dentine): Coca-Cola 7.5 mg/6.6 mg; Coca-Cola light 5.2 mg/3.5 mg, Sprite 26.1 mg/17.7 mg, apple juice 27.1 mg/15.2 mg, Red Bull 16.6 mg/17.0 mg, orange juice 24.3 mg/20.2 mg, Bonaqua Fruits (Mango-Acai) 17.8 mg/16.2 mg, tap water -0.2 mg/-0.3 mg, swimming pool water -0.3 mg/-0.2 mg, and lemon juice 32.0 mg/28.3 mg. From all drinks, Cola and Cola light showed the least erosivity (p<0.001, ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test) whereas lemon juice showed statistically significant higher erosivity than all other drinks except Sprite and apple juice (p<0.01, ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test).ConclusionsIn conclusion, erosivity of common non-alcoholic drinks varies widely. For example, Sprite, apple juice, and orange juice are about five times more erosive than Coca-Cola light. The findings from the present study should be taken into account in choosing a diet that provides satisfactory nutrition while minimizing tooth erosion.