Clinical Performance of a Glass-ionomer Restorative System: A 6-year Evaluation
Randomized, Controlled Trial of Glass Ionomer System vs Composite Posterior Restorations
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- a need for at least two but not more than four posterior toothcolored restorations;
- the presence of teeth to be restored in occlusion;
- teeth that were symptomless and vital;
- a normal periodontal status;
- a good likelihood of recall availability.
Exclusion Criteria:
- partly erupted teeth;
- absence of adjacent and antagonist teeth
- poor periodontal status;
- adverse medical history;
- potential behavioral problems.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: TREATMENT
- Allocation: RANDOMIZED
- Interventional Model: PARALLEL
- Masking: DOUBLE
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: EQUIA
randomly applied
|
Placing glass ionomer restorations, the dentin and enamel of cavities were conditioned with 20% polyacrylic acid for 20 seconds, washed, and briefly dried.
Equia Fil was injected into the cavity.
Isolation was maintained using cotton rolls and a saliva ejector.
After the setting time of 2.5 minutes, the restoration was polished wet using high-speed fine diamonds.
When the restoration was briefly dried, Equia Coat was applied and photocured for 20 seconds using a photo-curing light.
Other Names:
|
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Gradia Direct Posterior
randomly applied
|
The enamel and dentin were conditioned with G-Bond adhesive using a microtip applicator, left undisturbed for five to 10 seconds, and then dried thoroughly for five seconds with oil-free air under air pressure, Gradia Direct Posterior resin was applied with the incremental technique (2 mm thick layers) and light-cured for 20 seconds.
Finally, the restoration was shaped with finishing diamonds and silicon instruments.
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal discoloration.
Time Frame: From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
Marginal discolouration was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians.
Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed .
A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced.
Alpha: No discoloration anywhere along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth.
Bravo: Slight discoloration along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth.
Charlie: The discoloration penetrated along the margin of the restorative material in a pulpal direction.
|
From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
|
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding retention rate.
Time Frame: From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
Retention rate was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians.
Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed .
A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced.
Alpha 1:Clinically excellent Alpha 2: Clinically good with slight deviations from ideal performance, correction possible without damage of tooth or restoration Bravo: Clinically sufficient with few defects, corrections or repair of the restoration possible Charlie: Restoration is partially missed Delta: Restoration is totally missed
|
From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
|
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding anatomic form.
Time Frame: From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
Anatomic form was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians.
Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed .
A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced.
Alpha 1: Continuous with existing anatomical form Alpha 2: Slightly discontinuous due to some chipping on the proximal ridge Bravo: Discontinuous with existing anatomical form due to material loss but proximal contact still present Charlie: Proximal contact is lost with ridge fracture.
|
From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
|
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation.
Time Frame: From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
Marginal adaptation was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians.
Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed .
A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced.
Alpha 1: Harmonious outline Alpha 2: Marginal gap (max 100µ) with discoloration (removable) Bravo: Marginal gap (> 100µ) with discoloration (unremovable) Charlie: The restoration is fractured or missed.
|
From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
|
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding color change.
Time Frame: From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
Colour changes was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians.
Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed .
A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced.
Alpha: The restoration matches the adjacent tooth structure in color and translucency.
Bravo: Light mismatch in color, shade or translucency between the restoration and the adjacent tooth.
Charlie: The mismatch in color and translucency is outside the acceptable range of tooth color and translucency.
|
From baseline to 6 year the change of restorations was evaluated
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
Helpful Links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Study Start
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ESTIMATE)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- HEK 09/112-10
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.