Summary
This in vitro study evaluated the effects of five whitening toothpastes on the surface roughness of two bulk-fill resin composites (GrandioSO x-tra, Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior) and one nanohybrid composite (Clearfil Majesty Esthetic) using simulated toothbrushing at 5 and 30 minutes. The study does not measure heavy-metal contamination; it assesses the mechanical effects of whitening dentifrices on restorative dental materials. This source has no primary metals occurrence data relevant to the Toothpaste (Cat 2) page’s contamination profile. It is catalogued here because it was deposited in the HMI-FILL-0055 toothpaste batch but does not contribute to the metals evidence base.
Evidence Fitness
Context only. This source contains no heavy-metal concentration data. It evaluates toothpaste-material interaction (surface roughness) rather than toothpaste heavy-metal content. It does not contribute to the metals evidence tables on Toothpaste (Cat 2).
Methods (brief)
Five whitening toothpastes (Opalescence Whitening, Colgate Optic White, Rocs Sensation Whitening, Signal White Now, Curaprox Black Is White) and a distilled-water control were applied to 60 disc specimens (10 per group) of three composite resins using an electric toothbrush at 2 N constant force for 5 and 30 minutes. Surface roughness (Ra, micrometres) measured with a contact profilometer. Statistical analysis: two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc tests (alpha = 0.05).
Implications
- Certification: No contribution to metals occurrence data or threshold work.
- Courses: May be useful as background context in a module on whitening toothpaste formulations (shows that enzymatic/charcoal/optical-whitening agents have different abrasive profiles), but not metals-relevant.
- App: Not applicable.
Related evidence
None — this source does not carry metals data applicable to any wiki metals or ingredient page.
Update history
No substantive edit history is available in this build. The full commit record is available in git.