Operators' Ease and Satisfaction in Restoring Class II Cavities With Sectional Matrix Versus Circumferential Matrix System at Qassim University Dental Clinics.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the operator's ease, satisfaction, and comfort of using a circumferential matrix system and sectional matrix system on the proximal contact points and contours when restoring class II cavities in posterior teeth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study was performed at the clinics in the Department of Conservative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Qassim University. A total of 105 dental students randomly participated in this study to restore a class II cavity with direct composite resin restoration. Operators' comfort and satisfaction were evaluated according to their assessment of the contact points they reproduced and the emergence profiles of restorations, using a circumferential matrix system and sectional matrix system.

RESULTS

Out of 105 operators, 57 were satisfied with using circumferential matrix bands for most of their cases while 78 of the operators were satisfied with sectional matrix bands. There were no significant differences between operator satisfaction and the use of circumferential matrix band system (P > 0.05) and sectional matrix band system (P = 0.134) but there was a significant difference between difficulty levels in the use of both matrix band systems (P < 0.05; P = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

Circumferential and sectional matrix band systems showed no significant differences with operators' satisfaction during restoring class II cavities in posterior teeth but using a sectional matrix band system was considered easier than using a circumferential matrix band system.