Cargando…

A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: This randomized clinical trial (RCT) aimed to compare the 3-year survival rates of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations (HVGIC) using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative technique (ART) in primary molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this RCT, 139 schoolchildren...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yunus, G. Y., Sharma, Hunny, Itagi, Afreen Begum H., Srivastava, Himanshu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8672129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35003560
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.330876
_version_ 1784615295660326912
author Yunus, G. Y.
Sharma, Hunny
Itagi, Afreen Begum H.
Srivastava, Himanshu
author_facet Yunus, G. Y.
Sharma, Hunny
Itagi, Afreen Begum H.
Srivastava, Himanshu
author_sort Yunus, G. Y.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This randomized clinical trial (RCT) aimed to compare the 3-year survival rates of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations (HVGIC) using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative technique (ART) in primary molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this RCT, 139 schoolchildren aged 6–9 years with dentinal caries in primary molars were randomly allocated to groups, i.e. the ART group and the conventional group, utilizing a random number generator. Adequate allocation concealment was done. Intervention was delivered using standard procedure and GC Fuji IX ART HVGIC was used as restorations in both the groups. Analysis was carried in 92 participants, and survival rates in both the groups were compared at 12, 24, and 36-month intervals. IBM SPSS software was utilized to analyze the time taken for the procedure and the Kaplan–Meier estimate was used to assess the survival rates. P value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The ART took longer to complete (16.48 ± 2.02 min) versus conventional rotary instrumentation (13.15 ± 1.32 min). The conventional method was slightly superior as compared to ART; excellent survival rates (i.e. >90%) were achieved in both groups at the end of 12-month follow-up with no significant differences at the end of 24 and 36 months as evident from Kaplan–Meier estimate (P = 0.255). CONCLUSION: Three-year follow-up showed that GIC restorations with ART and conventional method carried out using GC Fuji IX ART HVGIC were acceptably successful, substantiating the use of ART for the primary dentition in areas with high caries prevalence and limited access to dental care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8672129
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86721292022-01-06 A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial Yunus, G. Y. Sharma, Hunny Itagi, Afreen Begum H. Srivastava, Himanshu Dent Res J (Isfahan) Original Article BACKGROUND: This randomized clinical trial (RCT) aimed to compare the 3-year survival rates of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations (HVGIC) using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative technique (ART) in primary molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this RCT, 139 schoolchildren aged 6–9 years with dentinal caries in primary molars were randomly allocated to groups, i.e. the ART group and the conventional group, utilizing a random number generator. Adequate allocation concealment was done. Intervention was delivered using standard procedure and GC Fuji IX ART HVGIC was used as restorations in both the groups. Analysis was carried in 92 participants, and survival rates in both the groups were compared at 12, 24, and 36-month intervals. IBM SPSS software was utilized to analyze the time taken for the procedure and the Kaplan–Meier estimate was used to assess the survival rates. P value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The ART took longer to complete (16.48 ± 2.02 min) versus conventional rotary instrumentation (13.15 ± 1.32 min). The conventional method was slightly superior as compared to ART; excellent survival rates (i.e. >90%) were achieved in both groups at the end of 12-month follow-up with no significant differences at the end of 24 and 36 months as evident from Kaplan–Meier estimate (P = 0.255). CONCLUSION: Three-year follow-up showed that GIC restorations with ART and conventional method carried out using GC Fuji IX ART HVGIC were acceptably successful, substantiating the use of ART for the primary dentition in areas with high caries prevalence and limited access to dental care. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8672129/ /pubmed/35003560 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.330876 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Dental Research Journal https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Yunus, G. Y.
Sharma, Hunny
Itagi, Afreen Begum H.
Srivastava, Himanshu
A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial
title A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial
title_full A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial
title_short A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial
title_sort comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: a randomized clinical trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8672129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35003560
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.330876
work_keys_str_mv AT yunusgy acomparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT sharmahunny acomparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT itagiafreenbegumh acomparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT srivastavahimanshu acomparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT yunusgy comparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT sharmahunny comparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT itagiafreenbegumh comparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT srivastavahimanshu comparativesurvivalanalysisofhighviscosityglassionomerrestorationsusingconventionalcavitypreparationandatraumaticrestorativetreatmenttechniqueinprimarymolarsarandomizedclinicaltrial