umu.sePublikationer
Ändra sökning
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: a five-year follow-up
Visa övriga samt affilieringar
2009 (Engelska)Ingår i: The Journal of the American Dental Association (1939), ISSN 0002-8177, E-ISSN 1943-4723, Vol. 140, nr 4, s. 447-54Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) 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.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
2009. Vol. 140, nr 4, s. 447-54
Nyckelord [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
Tillgänglig från: 2009-04-28 Skapad: 2009-04-16 Senast uppdaterad: 2018-06-08Bibliografiskt granskad

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltext saknas i DiVA

PubMed

Personposter BETA

van Dijken, Jan W V

Sök vidare i DiVA

Av författaren/redaktören
van Dijken, Jan W V
Av organisationen
Odontologi
I samma tidskrift
The Journal of the American Dental Association (1939)

Sök vidare utanför DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetricpoäng

pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 128 träffar
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

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