Background: There is insufficient evidence from the dental literatureto make any recommendations about which filling material touse in paediatric dentistry. Choices in these areas are made onclinical preference.Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical behaviour ofaesthetic restorations in Class II preparations in primary molars byusing two different materials.Design: The authors conducted a randomized clinical trial. Twentyeightpatients received 56 restorations in primary molars randomlyassigned by lottery method in a split mouth technique: 28restorations with traditional universal microfilled composite and28 restorations with SDRTM (Dentsply). Two examiners, whosetechnique has been calibrated, evaluated the restorations usingmodified U.S. Public Health Service criteria at baseline and at 3,6, 9 and 12 months.Results: After 1 year, there were no statistical differences betweenSDR and traditional composite about Marginal Adaptation,Anatomical Form, Cavosurface Margin, Discoloration, AxialContour, Secondary Caries and Visible Plaque Index. However,there was a decreasing odd radio and a P < 0.05 between the twomaterials regarding the Proximal Contact.Conclusions: At the 12-month clinical recall, the authors found nodifferences among SDR and traditional composite in Class IIrestorations in primary molars. SDR showed a good behaviour andit was very appreciated by the patients and by the authors for itsfast and easy manipulation.

SDR versus traditional composite. A RCT onpaediatric patients / Giannetti, Luca; A., Murri; D., Diago. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRIC DENTISTRY. - ISSN 0960-7439. - STAMPA. - 21:(2011), pp. 106-106. (Intervento presentato al convegno 23rd Congress of the International Association of Paediatric Dentistry tenutosi a Athens, Greece nel 15-18 June 2011).

SDR versus traditional composite. A RCT onpaediatric patients

GIANNETTI, Luca;
2011

Abstract

Background: There is insufficient evidence from the dental literatureto make any recommendations about which filling material touse in paediatric dentistry. Choices in these areas are made onclinical preference.Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical behaviour ofaesthetic restorations in Class II preparations in primary molars byusing two different materials.Design: The authors conducted a randomized clinical trial. Twentyeightpatients received 56 restorations in primary molars randomlyassigned by lottery method in a split mouth technique: 28restorations with traditional universal microfilled composite and28 restorations with SDRTM (Dentsply). Two examiners, whosetechnique has been calibrated, evaluated the restorations usingmodified U.S. Public Health Service criteria at baseline and at 3,6, 9 and 12 months.Results: After 1 year, there were no statistical differences betweenSDR and traditional composite about Marginal Adaptation,Anatomical Form, Cavosurface Margin, Discoloration, AxialContour, Secondary Caries and Visible Plaque Index. However,there was a decreasing odd radio and a P < 0.05 between the twomaterials regarding the Proximal Contact.Conclusions: At the 12-month clinical recall, the authors found nodifferences among SDR and traditional composite in Class IIrestorations in primary molars. SDR showed a good behaviour andit was very appreciated by the patients and by the authors for itsfast and easy manipulation.
2011
21
106
106
Giannetti, Luca; A., Murri; D., Diago
SDR versus traditional composite. A RCT onpaediatric patients / Giannetti, Luca; A., Murri; D., Diago. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRIC DENTISTRY. - ISSN 0960-7439. - STAMPA. - 21:(2011), pp. 106-106. (Intervento presentato al convegno 23rd Congress of the International Association of Paediatric Dentistry tenutosi a Athens, Greece nel 15-18 June 2011).
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/746002
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact