Bhatia Hind P, Sood Shveta, Sharma Naresh, Singh Akshara, Rajagopal Varshini
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Manav Rachna Dental College, Faridabad, Haryana, India.
Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Manav Rachna Dental College, New Delhi, India.
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2021 Nov-Dec;14(6):748-751. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2060.
To compare two matrix systems (circumferential and sectional) based on clinical efficiency and patient acceptability for placement of visible light cure composite resin restorative material in a Class II cavity in primary molars.
Thirty children with bilateral Class II cavities of age-group 5-9 years were selected. A split-mouth comparative experimental study was conducted at Manav Rachna Dental College, India. Cavities were restored using either circumferential or sectional matrix band system. The child upon completion of the treatment filled the subject preference questionnaire. Time assessment was done for matrix system placement. Contact points were evaluated using dental floss as open or closed.
Time required to place sectional matrices was more (125.30 ± 29.40) than required for circumferential matrices (117.20 ± 38.94). The sectional matrices group has more ideal contacts (23) (76.7%) than the circumferential matrices group (16) (53.3%). About 70% of the children pointed discomfort toward the sectional matrices. Children in this study accepted circumferential matrices to be more comfortable than the sectional matrices group.
The circumferential matrices group was more time efficient compared to the sectional matrices group. However, sectional matrices resulted in a greater number of restorations with ideal contacts. Based on the preference circumferential matrix band system has been found superior to sectional matrix band system.
This study was conducted to find a better matrix system in case of pediatric patients. Circumferential matrices were found to be more superior with respect to preference and time efficiency and sectional matrices were preferred for ideal contacts.
Bhatia HP, Sood S, Sharma N, Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(6):748-751.
比较两种基质系统(环形和分段式)在乳牙Ⅱ类洞可见光固化复合树脂修复材料放置中的临床效率和患者可接受性。
选取30名年龄在5 - 9岁、双侧患有Ⅱ类洞的儿童。在印度马纳夫拉奇纳牙科学院进行了一项双口对照实验研究。使用环形或分段式基质带系统修复龋洞。治疗完成后,儿童填写受试者偏好问卷。对基质系统放置进行时间评估。使用牙线评估接触点是开放还是封闭。
放置分段式基质所需时间(125.30 ± 29.40)比环形基质所需时间(117.20 ± 38.94)长。分段式基质组的理想接触(23个)(76.7%)比环形基质组(16个)(53.3%)多。约70%的儿童指出分段式基质会引起不适。本研究中的儿童认为环形基质比分段式基质组更舒适。
与分段式基质组相比,环形基质组在时间效率上更高。然而,分段式基质产生了更多具有理想接触的修复体。基于偏好,环形基质带系统被发现优于分段式基质带系统。
本研究旨在为儿科患者找到更好的基质系统。发现环形基质在偏好和时间效率方面更具优势,而分段式基质在实现理想接触方面更受青睐。
Bhatia HP, Sood S, Sharma N, 乳牙Ⅱ类洞修复中环形基质和分段式基质使用的临床效率及患者可接受性的比较评价:一项体内研究。《国际临床儿科牙科杂志》2021年;14(6):748 - 751。