State Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Basic Science of Stomatology (Hubei-MOST) & Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Department of Preventive Dentistry, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Int J Oral Sci. 2014 Jun;6(2):111-5. doi: 10.1038/ijos.2014.8. Epub 2014 Mar 14.
To compare the levels of agreement and the survival rates of sealant retention for different sealing materials over a 2-year period assessed using the visual clinical examination and replica methods, sealant retention data were obtained by visual clinical examination and from replicas of the same sealed tooth at baseline and at 0.5-, 1- and 2-year evaluation points in 407 children and were compared for agreement using kappa coefficients. Survival curves of retained sealants on occlusal surfaces were created using modified categorisation (fully retained sealants and those having all pits and fissures partly covered with the sealant material versus completely lost sealants that included pit and fissure systems that had ≥1 pit re-exposed) according to the Kaplan-Meier method. The kappa coefficient for the agreement between both assessment methods over the three evaluation time points combined was 0.38 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35-0.41). More sealant retention was observed from replicas than through visual clinical examination. Cumulative survival curves at the three evaluation times were not statistically significantly higher when assessed from replicas (P=0.47). Using the replica method, more retained sealant material was observed than through visual clinical examination during the 2-year period. This finding did not result in a difference in the survival rates of sealants assessed by the two assessment methods. When replicas cast in die stone are used for assessing sealant retention, the level of reliability of the data is higher than that of data obtained through the commonly used visual clinical examination, particularly if such assessments are conducted over time.
为了比较不同密封材料在 2 年时间内的保留率和留存率，采用视觉临床检查和复制方法进行评估，本研究通过视觉临床检查和从基线和 0.5、1 和 2 年评估点同一密封牙的复制件中获得密封保留数据，并使用kappa 系数比较一致性。使用改良分类（完全保留的密封剂和那些具有所有窝沟部分覆盖密封材料的密封剂与完全丢失的密封剂相比，后者包括至少 1 个窝沟重新暴露的窝沟系统）根据 Kaplan-Meier 方法创建窝沟封闭剂在咬合面的留存生存曲线。两种评估方法在三个评估时间点的一致性的 kappa 系数为 0.38（95%置信区间（CI）：0.35-0.41）。从复制件观察到的密封保留率高于视觉临床检查。在三个评估时间点，从复制件评估的累积生存曲线没有统计学显著差异（P=0.47）。使用复制方法，在 2 年期间观察到的保留密封材料比通过视觉临床检查观察到的更多。这一发现并没有导致两种评估方法评估的密封剂存活率存在差异。当使用在模具石中铸造的复制件来评估密封剂保留率时，数据的可靠性水平高于通常使用的视觉临床检查获得的数据，特别是如果此类评估随时间进行。
