首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry >A comparative evaluation of retention of pit and fissure sealant bonded using sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-generation adhesives: An in vivo study
【24h】

A comparative evaluation of retention of pit and fissure sealant bonded using sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-generation adhesives: An in vivo study

机译:使用第六代,第七代和第八代粘合剂粘结的凹坑和裂缝密封剂的保留力的比较评估:一项体内研究

获取原文
       

摘要

Introduction: Dental caries is one of the most common preventable childhood infections. a number of measures are available to prevent occlusal caries; pit and fissure sealants are one of the various methods currently available to cost effectively reduce dental caries. Aim: To evaluate the retention of pit and fissure sealant bonded using sixth (Adper promt), seventh (Optibond) and eighth (Futurabond Dual Cure) generations of adhesives. Settings and Design: A total of 37 healthy children who fulfilled the inclusion were randomly selected. A total of 148 teeth (4 in each subject) were used as samples for the study. Methods and Material: The teeth to be sealed were then isolated using rubber dam. The placement of adhesives was done using split mouth design. The first permanent molars were randomly divided into four groups on the basis of sealant placed without and with using 6th, 7th and 8th generation bonding agents as follows: GROUP A (N=37):- Pit and fissure sealant placed without bonding agent. GROUP B (N=37):- Pit and fissure sealant placed following sixth generation bonding agent (ADPER PROMT). GROUP C (N=37):- Pit and fissure sealant placed following seventh generation bonding agent. (OPTIBOND). GROUP D (N=37):- Pit and fissure sealant placed following eighth generation bonding agent. (FUTURA BOND DUAL CURE). The integrity of the sealant placed was assessed immediately after completion of the procedure, 3 months and 6 months after placement. The post-operative evaluation for retention was done using Simonsen criteria. A score of 0 was given for complete retention, 1 for partial retention and 2 for no retention. Statistical analysis used: The statistical analysis was done using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) software version 21. Results: It was found that there was no statistically significant difference between the groups after 3 and 6 months as the value obtained (0.133) was much greater than the p-value (0.05). Conclusions: This study concluded that the use of bonding agent prior to application of pit and fissure sealant does not necessarily aid in retention of sealant as compared to pit and fissure sealant placed without bonding agent, Sealants effectiveness is directly related to its retention and it dependent on application procedures. The failure of retention of pit and fissure sealants can attribute to moisture contamination, improper curing methods, inadequate adhesion, improper application procedure or early age placement.
机译:简介:龋齿是最常见的可预防的儿童期感染之一。有许多措施可以预防咬合龋;凹坑和裂缝密封剂是目前可用于经济有效地减少龋齿的各种方法之一。目的:评估使用第六代(Adper promt),第七代(Optibond)和第八代(Futurabond Dual Cure)粘合剂粘结的凹坑和裂缝密封剂的保持力。设置和设计:随机选择了符合纳入标准的37名健康儿童。总共148颗牙齿(每个受试者4颗)用作研究样本。方法和材料:用橡胶坝隔离待密封的牙齿。胶粘剂的放置采用开口设计。根据第一代恒磨牙在不使用和使用第6代,第7代和第8代的密封剂的情况下随机分为四组粘合剂如下:组A(N = 37):-坑缝密封剂没有粘合剂。 B组(N = 37):-在第六代粘合剂(ADPER PROMT)之后放置了坑缝密封剂。 C组(N = 37):-在第七代粘接剂之后加入坑缝密封剂。 (OPTIBOND)。 D组(N = 37):-在第八代粘接剂之后加入坑缝密封剂。 (FUTURA BOND双重固化)。程序完成后,放置后3个月和6个月立即评估放置的密封剂的完整性。术后保留率的评估是使用西蒙森标准进行的。完全保留的评分为0,部分保留的评分为1,无保留的评分为2。使用的统计分析:使用SPSS(社会科学统计软件包)软件版本21进行统计分析。结果:发现3个月和6个月后两组之间在统计学上无显着差异,因为获得的值为(0.133)远大于p值(0.05)。结论:本研究的结论是,与不使用粘合剂的凹坑和裂缝密封剂相比,在使用凹坑和裂缝密封剂之前使用粘合剂并不一定有助于保留密封剂,密封剂的有效性直接与其保持力有关,并且取决于关于申请程序。保留凹坑和裂缝密封胶的失败可能归因于湿气污染,固化方法不当,附着力不足,施工程序不当或早期放置。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号