Residual caries and marginal integrity in relation to Class II glass ionomer restorations in primary molars.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of three treatment methods (ART, Carisolv(TM) and rotary instruments) in caries removal and sealing capability of hand-mixed glass ionomer in the management of proximal caries in deciduous molars.

METHODS

In a clinical study 217 dentally naïve children (age 7.5, SD 0.57) were randomly divided in three treatment groups and among 4 operators. Each child received one class II glass ionomer restoration. Immediately after restoration bitewings were made. The dependent variables were: residual caries and marginal adaptation. Independent variables were operator effect, child's behaviour and time to remove caries.

RESULTS

There was no statistical significant difference in residual caries between the three treatment methods (p < 0.05). In 33% of the cases a clear radiolucency underneath the restoration was visible on the bitewings. In 26% doubt existed on the presence of residual caries. A clear cervical gap was seen in 16% of the restorations, while in 18% signs of cervical gaps were less obvious. Between the four operators a significant difference in relation to residual caries (p = 0.015) was found as well as a significant difference between the operators for the preparation time in the three treatment methods (p < 0.05). The child's behaviour seems to have no influence on residual caries and marginal gaps.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that there is no preparation method superior to another, though the treatment methods seem to be sensitive for operator effects. Using hand-mixed glass ionomer cement resulted in considerable number of cervical gaps found.