umu.sePublikasjoner
Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: a five-year follow-up
Vise andre og tillknytning
2009 (engelsk)Inngår i: The Journal of the American Dental Association (1939), ISSN 0002-8177, E-ISSN 1943-4723, Vol. 140, nr 4, s. 447-54Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Research has suggested that packable resin-based composites inserted with a placement technique similar to amalgam condensation can reduce the sensitivity associated with posterior restorations. The authors evaluated the clinical performance, including associated sensitivity, of two packable composites in a randomized five-year clinical trial. METHODS: A single operator randomly placed two restorations in each of 33 patients: one restoration consisting of Alert (Jeneric/Pentron, Wallingford, Conn.) and the other consisting of SureFil (Dentsply/Caulk, Milford, Del.). There were 30 Class I and 36 Class II restorations. Two independent evaluators evaluated the restorations by using modified U.S. Public Health Service criteria. The authors analyzed data by means of the Fisher, chi(2) and McNemar tests at P < .05. RESULTS: Of 60 restorations evaluated at five years, two Class II restorations (one SureFil, one Alert) failed. All other restorations received the highest score possible for sensitivity and vitality. The only difference between the composites at the five-year recall was the significantly better surface texture of SureFil. The authors observed significantly different scores between the baseline and at five years for marginal discoloration (Alert and SureFil), surface texture (Alert and SureFil) and color (SureFil). CONCLUSIONS: Both packable resin-based composites showed excellent durability during the five-year follow-up. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The investigated resin-based composites are suitable for posterior restorations.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
2009. Vol. 140, nr 4, s. 447-54
Emneord [en]
Adhesives, dental restoration, resin-based composites, randomized controlled clinical trial
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-21688PubMedID: 19339534OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-21688DiVA, id: diva2:213657
Tilgjengelig fra: 2009-04-28 Laget: 2009-04-16 Sist oppdatert: 2018-06-08bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

PubMed

Personposter BETA

van Dijken, Jan W V

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
van Dijken, Jan W V
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
The Journal of the American Dental Association (1939)

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric

pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 130 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf