Effects of Over-the-Counter Whitening Products on Microhardness, Gloss Retention, and Surface Roughness of Z350 XT Universal Restorative Composite Resin

Objectives: This study investigated the effects of three over-the-counter (OTC) whitening products, whitening pen (WP, Dazzling White Instant Whitening Pen, Dazzling White, Grand Rapids, MI, USA), whitening mouthwash (MW, Colgate Optic White, Colgate-Palmolive, New York, NY, USA), and whitening toothpaste (TP, Crest 3D White, Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH, USA), on the microhardness, gloss retention, and surface roughness of a nanofilled resin composite (Filtek Z350 XT Universal Restorative, 3M ESPE). Methods: Composite resin specimens were prepared and subjected to treatment with WP, MW, or TP. Microhardness, gloss retention, and surface roughness were measured before and after treatment. Data were subjected to statistical analysis, with normality assessed by Shapiro–Wilk testing. Parametric data were summarized as mean ± SD, and differences were evaluated using paired t-tests and one-way ANOVA with a significance level of p ≤ 0. 05. Results: All whitening products significantly altered the tested surface properties. Microhardness decreased in all groups (MD [95% CI]: 2.28 [1.84–2.71] for WP, 5.05 [4.22–5.88] for MW, and 3.09 [2.35–3.83] for TP; p < 0.001), with the greatest reduction observed in the MW group. Gloss retention also declined significantly (MD [95% CI]: 9.52 [6.28–12.76] for WP, 17.97 [14.92–21.01] for MW, and 18.92 [15.64–22.21] for TP; p < 0.001), with TP and MW showing greater loss compared to WP. Surface roughness increased significantly within each group (MD [95% CI]: −0.07 [–0.10 to −0.04] for WP, −0.23 [–0.30 to −0.16] for MW, and −0.25 [–0.38 to −0.13] for TP; p < 0.001), although no significant differences were found among groups in post-treatment values. Conclusions: OTC whitening products adversely affected the optical and mechanical properties of Z350 XT universal composite resin. Whitening MW caused the most pronounced microhardness reduction, while MW and TP induced greater gloss loss than WP. Clinicians should consider the potential impact of whitening products on resin composite restorations when advising patients on their use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Prosthesis
Published
2026-01-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/prosthesis8010012
Primary Topic
Dental Erosion and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Effects of Over-the-Counter Whitening Products on Microhardness, Gloss Retention, and Surface Roughness of Z350 XT Universal Restorative Composite Resin

Mashael Binhasan, Nourah Shono, Sara Shabib, Haifa Barakah et al.
Prosthesis
Dental Erosion and Treatment
article

Effects of Over-the-Counter Whitening Products on Microhardness, Gloss Retention, and Surface Roughness of Z350 XT Universal Restorative Composite Resin

Mashael Binhasan, Nourah Shono, Sara Shabib, Haifa Barakah, Sami Al-Khamees, Shahad Alsumikhi, Reem Alkhraiyef, Nassr Al-Maflehi
article en

Abstract

Objectives: This study investigated the effects of three over-the-counter (OTC) whitening products, whitening pen (WP, Dazzling White Instant Whitening Pen, Dazzling White, Grand Rapids, MI, USA), whitening mouthwash (MW, Colgate Optic White, Colgate-Palmolive, New York, NY, USA), and whitening toothpaste (TP, Crest 3D White, Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH, USA), on the microhardness, gloss retention, and surface roughness of a nanofilled resin composite (Filtek Z350 XT Universal Restorative, 3M ESPE). Methods: Composite resin specimens were prepared and subjected to treatment with WP, MW, or TP. Microhardness, gloss retention, and surface roughness were measured before and after treatment. Data were subjected to statistical analysis, with normality assessed by Shapiro–Wilk testing. Parametric data were summarized as mean ± SD, and differences were evaluated using paired t-tests and one-way ANOVA with a significance level of p ≤ 0. 05. Results: All whitening products significantly altered the tested surface properties. Microhardness decreased in all groups (MD [95% CI]: 2.28 [1.84–2.71] for WP, 5.05 [4.22–5.88] for MW, and 3.09 [2.35–3.83] for TP; p < 0.001), with the greatest reduction observed in the MW group. Gloss retention also declined significantly (MD [95% CI]: 9.52 [6.28–12.76] for WP, 17.97 [14.92–21.01] for MW, and 18.92 [15.64–22.21] for TP; p < 0.001), with TP and MW showing greater loss compared to WP. Surface roughness increased significantly within each group (MD [95% CI]: −0.07 [–0.10 to −0.04] for WP, −0.23 [–0.30 to −0.16] for MW, and −0.25 [–0.38 to −0.13] for TP; p < 0.001), although no significant differences were found among groups in post-treatment values. Conclusions: OTC whitening products adversely affected the optical and mechanical properties of Z350 XT universal composite resin. Whitening MW caused the most pronounced microhardness reduction, while MW and TP induced greater gloss loss than WP. Clinicians should consider the potential impact of whitening products on resin composite restorations when advising patients on their use.

ProsthesisVol. 8(1)
King Saud University (SA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Dental Erosion and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.