Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM41423735
Blue Covarine in Toothpaste: A Comprehensive Review and Meta Analysis of Efficacy, Safety, and Potential Effects.
Jelenčiakova Nina, Petrović Bojan, Kojić Sanja, et al. · International journal of dental hygiene · 2026 · PubMed · doi:10.1111/idh.70019
Findings
Population Human participants (clinical studies)
6 findings
| Toothpaste containing blue covarine | Comparator toothpaste, other whitening method or baseline (as reported by each study) | Red-green axis (a*, CIELAB) change RCTs | MD -0.382 [-0.735, -0.030] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 119 participants |
| Toothpaste containing blue covarine | Comparator toothpaste, other whitening method or baseline (as reported by each study) | Lightness (L*, CIELAB) change RCTs | MD 0.475 [-1.823, 2.774] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 119 participants |
| Toothpaste containing blue covarine | Comparator toothpaste, other whitening method or baseline (as reported by each study) | Blue-yellow axis (b*, CIELAB) change RCTs | MD -4.022 [-8.755, 0.712] GRADE not reported 3 studies · 119 participants |
| Toothpaste containing blue covarine | Comparator toothpaste, other whitening method or baseline (as reported by each study) | Red-green axis (a*, CIELAB) change Cross-sectional clinical studies | MD 0.072 [-0.202, 0.346] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 502 participants |
| Toothpaste containing blue covarine | Comparator toothpaste, other whitening method or baseline (as reported by each study) | Blue-yellow axis (b*, CIELAB) change Cross-sectional clinical studies | MD -0.360 [-0.373, -0.347] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 502 participants |
| Toothpaste containing blue covarine | Comparator toothpaste, other whitening method or baseline (as reported by each study) | Lightness (L*, CIELAB) change Cross-sectional clinical studies | MD 0.201 [0.177, 0.225] GRADE not reported 2 studies · 502 participants |
Included primary studies 5
Open in Studies| Study | Year | Also included by | Outcomes it informs here | Trial data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collins 2008 Instant tooth whitening from a silica toothpaste containing blue covarine. PMID:18646366 | 2008 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Jiang 2019 Comparison of Whitening Dentifrices on the Effectiveness of In-office Tooth Bleaching: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. PMID:30106335 | 2019 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Meireles 2021 Efficacy of whitening toothpaste containing blue covarine: A double-blind controlled randomized clinical trial. PMID:32820846 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Porciani 2022 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Schlafer 2021 The whitening effect of single brushing with blue-covarine containing toothpaste-A randomized controlled trial. PMID:33346061 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Human participants of any age or gender | Human participants in 5 clinical studies (n=119 in 3 RCTs; n=502 in 2 cross-sectional studies) |
| Intervention | Toothpaste formulations containing blue covarine | Blue covarine toothpaste |
| Comparison | Placebo toothpaste or other tooth colour perception altering methods | Conventional or placebo toothpaste, bleaching groups, placebo chewing gum |
| Outcomes | Tooth colour change and perception of whiteness; safety and side effects | CIELAB L*, a* and b* changes (pooled); satisfaction and sensitivity (narrative) |
| Study designs | RCTs, non-randomised controlled trials, comparative, observational and experimental studies | 3 RCTs and 2 cross-sectional clinical studies |
| Timing | Not specified | Not specified |
AMSTAR 2 items
Two independent extractors rated each item. Their ratings are shown side by side because they have not been reconciled yet. The overall rating follows Shea et al. 2017: one critical flaw gives Low, more than one gives Critically Low.
| Item | Extractor A | Extractor B | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Research question includes PICO components | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 2Protocol established before the reviewcritical | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 3Choice of study designs explained | No | No | yes |
| 4Comprehensive literature searchcritical | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 5Study selection in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 6Data extraction in duplicate | No | No | yes |
| 7List of excluded studies with reasonscritical | No | No | yes |
| 8Included studies described in detail | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 9Risk of bias assessed satisfactorilycritical | RCT: Yes · NRSI: Yes | NRSI: Partial Yes · RCT: Partial Yes | no |
| 10Funding of included studies reported | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 11Appropriate meta-analysis methodscritical | RCT: No · NRSI: No | NRSI: No · RCT: No | no |
| 12Impact of risk of bias on the pooled results | No | No | yes |
| 13Risk of bias accounted for in interpretationcritical | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 14Heterogeneity explained | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 15Publication bias investigatedcritical | No | No | yes |
| 16Conflicts of interest reported | Yes | Yes | yes |
| Overall | Critically Low | Critically Low | yes |