File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: Evaluation after 30 months

TitleComparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: Evaluation after 30 months
Authors
KeywordsAmalgam
Atraumatic restorative treatment
Fissure sealant
Glass-ionomer cement
Issue Date2003
PublisherQuintessence Publishing Co, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.quintpub.com
Citation
Quintessence International, 2003, v. 34 n. 1, p. 31-37 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective: 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 glassionomer 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.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/67063
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 0.821
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.396
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGao, Wen_HK
dc.contributor.authorPeng, Den_HK
dc.contributor.authorSmales, RJen_HK
dc.contributor.authorYip, KHKen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T05:51:39Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T05:51:39Z-
dc.date.issued2003en_HK
dc.identifier.citationQuintessence International, 2003, v. 34 n. 1, p. 31-37en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0033-6572en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/67063-
dc.description.abstractObjective: 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 glassionomer 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.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherQuintessence Publishing Co, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.quintpub.comen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofQuintessence Internationalen_HK
dc.subjectAmalgamen_HK
dc.subjectAtraumatic restorative treatmenten_HK
dc.subjectFissure sealanten_HK
dc.subjectGlass-ionomer cementen_HK
dc.titleComparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: Evaluation after 30 monthsen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0033-6572&volume=34&spage=31&epage=37&date=2003&atitle=Comparison+of+Atraumatic+Restorative+Treatment+and+Conventional+Restorative+Procedures+in+a+Hospital+Clinic:+Evaluation+after+30+Monthsen_HK
dc.identifier.emailYip, KHK: kevin.h.k.yip@hkusua.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityYip, KHK=rp00027en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0037945462en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros80999en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0037945462&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume34en_HK
dc.identifier.issue1en_HK
dc.identifier.spage31en_HK
dc.identifier.epage37en_HK
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridGao, W=36045713300en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridPeng, D=36875199300en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSmales, RJ=7005372382en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYip, KHK=25423244900en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats