Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: evaluation after 30 months.
Quintessence Int. 2003 Jan; 34(1):31-7.QI

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate two glass-ionomer cements placed in the occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth, using two cavity preparation methods.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

Three dentists placed 149 restorations for 68 patients in a hospital clinic. Atraumatic restorative treatment or conventional cavity preparation methods were used for two encapsulated, high-strength conventional glass-ionomer cements: Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar. Non-gamma 2 amalgam alloy was used in conventional preparations for comparison.

RESULTS

The restorative procedures were uneventful, but cavity preparations made with atraumatic restorative treatment hand instruments took approximately twice as long as did conventional rotary instrumentation. After 30 months, only one glass-ionomer cement restoration had failed. Both glass-ionomer cements showed high early losses of sealant material, but caries was not detected in the exposed fissures. Both glass-ionomer cements also showed relatively high restoration wear. At 30 months, the mean cumulative net occlusal wear was 119 +/- 12 mm for Fuji IX GP and 96 +/- 13 mm for Ketac-Molar; the difference was not statistically significant. Color matching improved significantly by 6 months; there was no significant difference in color match between the two glass-ionomer cements by 12 months. Minor surface tarnishing and marginal discrepancies were present in the amalgam restorations and increased with time.

CONCLUSION

The occlusal restorations performed satisfactorily over periods of up to 30 months. However, the continued deterioration of the cements requires longer-term studies to be undertaken.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Prosthodontics, School of Stomatology, Beijing Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

12674356

Citation

Gao, Wei, et al. "Comparison of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and Conventional Restorative Procedures in a Hospital Clinic: Evaluation After 30 Months." Quintessence International (Berlin, Germany : 1985), vol. 34, no. 1, 2003, pp. 31-7.
Gao W, Peng D, Smales RJ, et al. Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: evaluation after 30 months. Quintessence Int. 2003;34(1):31-7.
Gao, W., Peng, D., Smales, R. J., & Yip, K. H. (2003). Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: evaluation after 30 months. Quintessence International (Berlin, Germany : 1985), 34(1), 31-7.
Gao W, et al. Comparison of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and Conventional Restorative Procedures in a Hospital Clinic: Evaluation After 30 Months. Quintessence Int. 2003;34(1):31-7. PubMed PMID: 12674356.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: evaluation after 30 months. AU - Gao,Wei, AU - Peng,Dong, AU - Smales,Roger J, AU - Yip,Kevin H K, PY - 2003/4/4/pubmed PY - 2003/6/11/medline PY - 2003/4/4/entrez SP - 31 EP - 7 JF - Quintessence international (Berlin, Germany : 1985) JO - Quintessence Int VL - 34 IS - 1 N2 - OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate two glass-ionomer cements placed in the occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth, using two cavity preparation methods. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Three dentists placed 149 restorations for 68 patients in a hospital clinic. Atraumatic restorative treatment or conventional cavity preparation methods were used for two encapsulated, high-strength conventional glass-ionomer cements: Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar. Non-gamma 2 amalgam alloy was used in conventional preparations for comparison. RESULTS: The restorative procedures were uneventful, but cavity preparations made with atraumatic restorative treatment hand instruments took approximately twice as long as did conventional rotary instrumentation. After 30 months, only one glass-ionomer cement restoration had failed. Both glass-ionomer cements showed high early losses of sealant material, but caries was not detected in the exposed fissures. Both glass-ionomer cements also showed relatively high restoration wear. At 30 months, the mean cumulative net occlusal wear was 119 +/- 12 mm for Fuji IX GP and 96 +/- 13 mm for Ketac-Molar; the difference was not statistically significant. Color matching improved significantly by 6 months; there was no significant difference in color match between the two glass-ionomer cements by 12 months. Minor surface tarnishing and marginal discrepancies were present in the amalgam restorations and increased with time. CONCLUSION: The occlusal restorations performed satisfactorily over periods of up to 30 months. However, the continued deterioration of the cements requires longer-term studies to be undertaken. SN - 0033-6572 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/12674356/Comparison_of_atraumatic_restorative_treatment_and_conventional_restorative_procedures_in_a_hospital_clinic:_evaluation_after_30_months_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -