Prathibha B, Reddy P Parthasarthi, Anjum Md Shakeel, Monica M, Praveen B H
Department of Public Health Dentistry, Sri Sai College of Dental Surgery, Vikarabad, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Dental Public Health Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, AIMST University, Bedong, Malaysia.
Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2019 Jan-Feb;16(1):36-41.
The aim of this study is comparing the retention and caries preventive effect of the glass-ionomer fissure sealant and resin-based fissure sealant.
A randomized-controlled split-mouth study was conducted to compare the retention and the caries preventive effect of light-cured resin-based sealant (3M ESPE) and glass ionomer sealant (Fuji VII). The sealants were applied to either the right or the left lower mandibular molars (7-9 yrs of age) in 120 school children, based on the randomization process. They were recalled for assessment of clinical retention at intervals of 3, 6, and 12 months. The caries-preventive effect between the two materials was tested statistically by the McNemar's test for matched pairs, and the differences observed with regard to the retention of the materials was tested by Chi-square tests. The level of significance was set to be at < 0.05.
At the end of 12 month, sealant retention is found to be higher in the resin-based sealant group compared to the glass ionomer group. In the glass ionomer sealants placed, 101 (91%) were caries-free and 10 (9%) had caries. In the resin-based sealant, 105 (94.60%) had sound teeth and 6 (5.4%) had dental caries ( = 0.34).
The glass ionomer sealant was less retentive when compared to resin sealants. The caries incidence between the glass ionomer and resin-based sealants was not statistically significant.
本研究旨在比较玻璃离子窝沟封闭剂和树脂基窝沟封闭剂的保留率及防龋效果。
进行一项随机对照半口研究,以比较光固化树脂基封闭剂(3M ESPE)和玻璃离子封闭剂(Fuji VII)的保留率及防龋效果。根据随机分组程序,为120名学龄儿童(7 - 9岁)的右下或左下下颌磨牙应用封闭剂。在3、6和12个月的间隔期对他们进行召回,以评估临床保留情况。通过配对的McNemar检验对两种材料的防龋效果进行统计学测试,通过卡方检验对材料保留方面观察到的差异进行测试。显著性水平设定为<0.05。
在12个月末,发现树脂基封闭剂组的封闭剂保留率高于玻璃离子组。在应用玻璃离子封闭剂的牙齿中,101颗(91%)无龋,10颗(9%)有龋。在树脂基封闭剂组中,105颗(94.60%)牙齿完好,6颗(5.4%)有龋齿(P = 0.34)。
与树脂封闭剂相比,玻璃离子封闭剂的保留率较低。玻璃离子封闭剂和树脂基封闭剂之间的龋齿发生率无统计学显著差异。