Enamel uptake and patient exposure to fluoride: comparison of APF gel and foam.

Gary M. Whitford, S. M. Adair, Carole M Hanes, E. C. Perdue, C. M. Russell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This crossover study with 46 child dental patients compared two topical APF products, a gel and a foam, with respect to the amounts of product and fluoride (F) applied, salivary F concentrations, and enamel F uptake. Half the subjects were treated for 4 min with the gel first and the other half with the foam. After approximately 16 days, each patient received a second treatment using the other product. An acid-etch enamel biopsy was performed and whole saliva samples were collected before and after each treatment. Significantly less F was applied to the teeth and retained by the subjects when the APF foam was used. Salivary F concentrations after treatment with the gel were higher than after treatment with the foam. The differences in enamel F uptake at both 15 min and 16 days after the APF applications, however, were not significant. We concluded that: 1) the two products are equivalent with respect to enamel F uptake; 2) only about one-fifth as much of the foam product is required for adequate coverage of the teeth, which significantly reduces F exposure and retention by the patient.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)199-203
Number of pages5
JournalPediatric dentistry
Volume17
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 1 1995

Fingerprint

Dental Enamel
Fluorides
Gels
Tooth
Therapeutics
Saliva
Cross-Over Studies
Biopsy
Acids

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Enamel uptake and patient exposure to fluoride : comparison of APF gel and foam. / Whitford, Gary M.; Adair, S. M.; Hanes, Carole M; Perdue, E. C.; Russell, C. M.

In: Pediatric dentistry, Vol. 17, No. 3, 01.05.1995, p. 199-203.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Whitford, Gary M. ; Adair, S. M. ; Hanes, Carole M ; Perdue, E. C. ; Russell, C. M. / Enamel uptake and patient exposure to fluoride : comparison of APF gel and foam. In: Pediatric dentistry. 1995 ; Vol. 17, No. 3. pp. 199-203.
@article{3a3053500277405b9c48617433688e27,
title = "Enamel uptake and patient exposure to fluoride: comparison of APF gel and foam.",
abstract = "This crossover study with 46 child dental patients compared two topical APF products, a gel and a foam, with respect to the amounts of product and fluoride (F) applied, salivary F concentrations, and enamel F uptake. Half the subjects were treated for 4 min with the gel first and the other half with the foam. After approximately 16 days, each patient received a second treatment using the other product. An acid-etch enamel biopsy was performed and whole saliva samples were collected before and after each treatment. Significantly less F was applied to the teeth and retained by the subjects when the APF foam was used. Salivary F concentrations after treatment with the gel were higher than after treatment with the foam. The differences in enamel F uptake at both 15 min and 16 days after the APF applications, however, were not significant. We concluded that: 1) the two products are equivalent with respect to enamel F uptake; 2) only about one-fifth as much of the foam product is required for adequate coverage of the teeth, which significantly reduces F exposure and retention by the patient.",
author = "Whitford, {Gary M.} and Adair, {S. M.} and Hanes, {Carole M} and Perdue, {E. C.} and Russell, {C. M.}",
year = "1995",
month = "5",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "199--203",
journal = "Pediatric Dentistry",
issn = "0164-1263",
publisher = "American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Enamel uptake and patient exposure to fluoride

T2 - comparison of APF gel and foam.

AU - Whitford, Gary M.

AU - Adair, S. M.

AU - Hanes, Carole M

AU - Perdue, E. C.

AU - Russell, C. M.

PY - 1995/5/1

Y1 - 1995/5/1

N2 - This crossover study with 46 child dental patients compared two topical APF products, a gel and a foam, with respect to the amounts of product and fluoride (F) applied, salivary F concentrations, and enamel F uptake. Half the subjects were treated for 4 min with the gel first and the other half with the foam. After approximately 16 days, each patient received a second treatment using the other product. An acid-etch enamel biopsy was performed and whole saliva samples were collected before and after each treatment. Significantly less F was applied to the teeth and retained by the subjects when the APF foam was used. Salivary F concentrations after treatment with the gel were higher than after treatment with the foam. The differences in enamel F uptake at both 15 min and 16 days after the APF applications, however, were not significant. We concluded that: 1) the two products are equivalent with respect to enamel F uptake; 2) only about one-fifth as much of the foam product is required for adequate coverage of the teeth, which significantly reduces F exposure and retention by the patient.

AB - This crossover study with 46 child dental patients compared two topical APF products, a gel and a foam, with respect to the amounts of product and fluoride (F) applied, salivary F concentrations, and enamel F uptake. Half the subjects were treated for 4 min with the gel first and the other half with the foam. After approximately 16 days, each patient received a second treatment using the other product. An acid-etch enamel biopsy was performed and whole saliva samples were collected before and after each treatment. Significantly less F was applied to the teeth and retained by the subjects when the APF foam was used. Salivary F concentrations after treatment with the gel were higher than after treatment with the foam. The differences in enamel F uptake at both 15 min and 16 days after the APF applications, however, were not significant. We concluded that: 1) the two products are equivalent with respect to enamel F uptake; 2) only about one-fifth as much of the foam product is required for adequate coverage of the teeth, which significantly reduces F exposure and retention by the patient.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029300887&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029300887&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 7617495

AN - SCOPUS:0029300887

VL - 17

SP - 199

EP - 203

JO - Pediatric Dentistry

JF - Pediatric Dentistry

SN - 0164-1263

IS - 3

ER -