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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |