Skip to main content
Toggle Menu of ADA WebSites
ADA Websites
Partnerships and Commissions
Toggle Search Area
Toggle Menu
e-mail Print Share

Baking soda toothpaste examined in November JADA supplement

November 06, 2017

By Michelle Manchir

Image of JADA Baking Soda SupplementDental professionals with questions about the safety or efficacy of baking soda toothpastes can turn to a supplement to the November issue of The Journal of the American Dental Association for answers.

The supplement, Baking Soda Dentifrices and Oral Health, features a compilation of reports based on research of the effects of baking soda as a dentifrice ingredient.  It is sponsored by Church & Dwight Co., Inc.

"A significant amount of evidence-based research data has been generated over the years relative to the safety and efficacy of baking soda containing dentifrices," said guest editor of the supplement, Dr. Sebastian Ciancio, distinguished service professor and chair in the Department of Periodontics and Endodontics at the School of Dental Medicine at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York.

"The highlights of the research findings discussed in this special issue are encapsulated in a format designed to facilitate an understanding of baking soda dentifrices as an important component of a patient-centered biofilm control program."

The supplement offers two continuing education credits for those who can answer questions about its content correctly online. To review the supplement and the CE, visit ADA.org/BakingSoda.

Meanwhile, the cover story for the November JADA features research that suggests dentists' clinical decisions can be "as diverse as the clinicians who make the decisions," according to an author of the article, "Impression Evaluation and Laboratory Use for Single-Unit Crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network."

For the research, the authors developed a questionnaire asking dentists about techniques used to fabricate single-unit crowns, showing participants photographs of four impressions and asking them to accept or reject each.

Researchers correlated responses with dentist and practice characteristics, such as a clinician's sex, race ethnicity and practice busyness, to determine the likelihood that a clinician accepts an impression for a single-unit crown and document crown remake rates.

After reviewing questionnaire responses from 1,777 dentists, the authors found that dentists "were largely consistent in their evaluation of impressions" although nonclinical factors were associated with whether an impression was accepted or rejected. For example, lower crown remake rates were associated with more experienced clinicians, optical impression and not using dual-arch trays.

"It is not just the quality of the impression that motivates us," said Dr. Michael McCracken, a dentist who has a Ph.D. and is a professor and director of special projects/high stakes assessment at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. "It is who we are as individuals as well."

To read the entire article, visit JADA.ADA.org.

Other highlights of the November issue of JADA include a systematic review and meta-analysis looking at intrapocket topical anesthetic versus injected anesthetic for pain control during scaling and root planing in adult patients; and an examination of the relationship between education debt and career choices in professional programs.

Every month, JADA articles are published online at JADA.ADA.org in advance of the print publication.