Randomized clinical trial of encapsulated and hand-mixed glassionomer ART restorations: One-year follow-up

14Citations
Citations of this article
80Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: This prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial evaluated the clinical performance of conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC; Riva Self-Cure, SDI), supplied in capsules or in powder/liquid kits and placed in Class I cavities in permanent molars by the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach. Material and Methods: A total of 80 restorations were randomly placed in 40 patients aged 11-15 years. Each patient received one restoration with each type of GIC. The restorations were evaluated after periods of 15 days (baseline), 6 months, and 1 year, according to ART criteria. Wilcoxon matched pairs, multivariate logistic regression, and Gehan-Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: Patients were evaluated after 15 days (n=40), 6 months (n=34), and 1 year (n=29). Encapsulated GICs showed significantly superior clinical performance compared with hand-mixed GICs at baseline (p=0.017), 6 months (p=0.001), and 1 year (p=0.026). For hand-mixed GIC, a statistically significant difference was only observed over the period of baseline to 1 year (p=0.001). Encapsulated GIC presented statistically significant differences for the following periods: 6 months to 1 year (p=0.028) and baseline to 1 year (p=0.002). Encapsulated GIC presented superior cumulative survival rate than hand-mixed GIC over one year. Importantly, both GICs exhibited decreased survival over time. Conclusions: Encapsulated GIC promoted better ART performance, with an annual failure rate of 24%; in contrast, hand-mixed GIC demonstrated a failure rate of 42%.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Freitas, M. C. C. de A., Fagundes, T. C., Modena, K. C. da S., Cardia, G. S., & Navarro, M. F. de L. (2018). Randomized clinical trial of encapsulated and hand-mixed glassionomer ART restorations: One-year follow-up. Journal of Applied Oral Science, 26. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2017-0129

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free