Comparison of Fissure Sealant Chair Time and Patients' Preference Using Three Different Isolation Techniques

Rahif E Mattar, Ayman M Sulimany, Saad S Binsaleh, Ibrahim M Al-Majed, Rahif E Mattar, Ayman M Sulimany, Saad S Binsaleh, Ibrahim M Al-Majed

Abstract

This randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the patient's preference and chair time needed during pit and fissure sealant placement under three isolation techniques (Isolite system, rubber dam isolation, and cotton roll isolation). Participants, aged 6-15 years and requiring four sealants on the first or second permanent molars, attending the pediatric dental clinics at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria. Each participant received sealants on three random first or second permanent molars using three isolation techniques. The time required for sealant placement was recorded for each technique. Following sealant placement, an interview-based questionnaire was administered to the participants to evaluate their preference regarding the isolation techniques. Forty-eight children (23 male and 25 female) with a mean age of 8.58 ± 1.93 years participated in this study. The mean chair times were 248.14, 255.89, and 243.29 s for the Isolite system, rubber dam isolation, and cotton roll isolation, respectively. Approximately 79% of participants considered cotton roll isolation to be the most comfortable, whereas approximately 71% were significantly less likely to use rubber dam isolation again. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in sealant placement time among the three isolation techniques. However, cotton roll isolation was the technique that was most preferred by the participants.

Keywords: Isolite; children; fissure sealants; isolation; patient preference; permanent molars; randomized clinical trial; time.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of the study following CONSORT recommendation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The Isolite System.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Patient preference for isolation techniques. * Differences are statistically significant (Chi-square test).

References

    1. Young D.A., Novy B.B., Zeller G.G., Hale R., Hart T.C., Truelove E.L. The American Dental Association Caries Classification System for clinical practice: A report of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2015;146:79–86. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2014.11.018.
    1. Brown L.J., Kaste L.M., Selwitz R.H., Furman L.J. Dental caries and sealant usage in US children, 1988–1991: Selected findings from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 1996;127:335–343. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1996.0203.
    1. Al Agili D.E. A systematic review of population-based dental caries studies among children in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Dent. J. 2013;25:3–11. doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2012.10.002.
    1. Al-Meedani L.A., Al-Dlaigan Y.H. Prevalence of dental caries and associated social risk factors among preschool children in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Pak. J. Med. Sci. 2016;32:452–456. doi: 10.12669/pjms.322.9439.
    1. Farooqi F.A., Khabeer A., Moheet I.A., Khan S.Q., Farooq I., ArRejaie A.S. Prevalence of dental caries in primary and permanent teeth and its relation with tooth brushing habits among schoolchildren in Eastern Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med. J. 2015;36:737–742. doi: 10.15537/smj.2015.6.10888.
    1. Farsi N. Developmental enamel defects and their association with dental caries in preschoolers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Oral Health Prev. Dent. 2010;8:85–92.
    1. Abolfotouh M.A., Hassan K.H., Khattab M.S., Youssef R.M., Sadek A., El-Sebaiei M. Dental caries: Experience in relation to wasting and stunted growth among schoolboys in Abha, Saudi Arabia. Ann. Saudi Med. 2000;20:360–363. doi: 10.5144/0256-4947.2000.360.
    1. Simonsen R.J. Clinical Applications of the Acid Etch Technique. Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc.; Chicago, IL, USA: 1978. Chapter 2: Pit and fissure sealants.
    1. Chabadel O., Veronneau J., Montal S., Tramini P., Moulis E. Effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants on primary molars: A 2-yr split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Eur. J. Oral Sci. 2021;129 doi: 10.1111/eos.12758.
    1. Straffon L.H., Dennison J.B., More F.G. Three-year evaluation of sealant: Effect of isolation on efficacy. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 1985;110:714–717. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1985.0425.
    1. Deery C. Strong evidence for the effectiveness of resin based sealants. Evid. Based Dent. 2013;14:69–70. doi: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6400945.
    1. Winkler R. Sanford Christie Barnum--inventor of the rubber dam. Quintessenz. 1991;42:483.
    1. Primosch R.E., Barr E.S. Sealant use and placement techniques among pediatric dentists. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2001;132:1442–1451. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2001.0061.
    1. Al-Abdulwahhab B.M., Al-Thabit H., Al-Harthi A., Shamina R., Al-Ashgai A., Al-Qabbani F., Al-Ghamdi S., Al-Taher R. The attitudes of dental interns to the use of the rubber dam at Riyadh dental colleges. Saudi Endod. J. 2012;2:75. doi: 10.4103/1658-5984.108153.
    1. Mala S., Lynch C.D., Burke F.M., Dummer P.M.H. Attitudes of final year dental students to the use of rubber dam. Int. Endod. J. 2009;42:632–638. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01569.x.
    1. Zyris Isolite® Illuminated Dental Isolation System. [(accessed on 14 March 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. Collette J., Wilson S., Sullivan D. A study of the Isolite system during sealant placement: Efficacy and patient acceptance. Pediatr. Dent. 2010;32:146–150.
    1. Alhareky M.S., Mermelstein D., Finkelman M., Alhumaid J., Loo C. Efficiency and patient satisfaction with the Isolite system versus rubber dam for sealant placement in pediatric patients. Pediatr. Dent. 2014;36:400–404.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum; Hillsdale, NJ, USA: 1988.
    1. Ismail A.I., Sohn W., Tellez M., Amaya A., Sen A., Hasson H., Pitts N.B. The International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS): An integrated system for measuring dental caries. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2007;35:170–178. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00347.x.
    1. Barkmeier W.W., Shaffer S.E., Gwinnett A.J. Effects of 15 vs. 60 s enamel acid conditioning on adhesion and morphology. Oper. Dent. 1986;11:111–116.
    1. Tandon S., Kumari R., Udupa S. The effect of etch-time on the bond strength of a sealant and on the etch-pattern in primary and permanent enamel: An evaluation. ASDC J. Dent. Child. 1989;56:186–190.
    1. Feigal R.J., Musherure P., Gillespie B., Levy-Polack M., Quelhas I., Hebling J. Improved sealant retention with bonding agents: A clinical study of two-bottle and single-bottle systems. J. Dent. Res. 2000;79:1850–1856. doi: 10.1177/00220345000790110601.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren