Retention of microfilled and hybrid resin-based composite in noncarious Class 5 lesions: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial.

W. D. Browning, W. W. Brackett, R. O. Gilpatrick

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This double-blind clinical trial was undertaken to compare the retention rate of restorative materials with contrasting stiffness in noncarious class 5 lesions. All restorations were placed using retraction cord and cotton roll isolation to more closely mimic the general practice setting. Thirty subjects with at least two lesions were recruited to participate in the study. Each subject received one restoration using Silux Plus and one using Z100. The assignment of material was randomized, and the subjects were unaware of which tooth had received which material. All restorations were placed with a fourth-generation adhesive liner, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose. Evaluations were performed at baseline, 6, and 12 months by two independent examiners unaware of the restoration's group identity. The restorations were evaluated using criteria developed by Cvar and Ryge in a forced-consensus model. Despite the fact that the two materials have widely different elastic modulus values, after 12 months no difference between the retention rates for the two groups was found, and both groups of restorations performed very well.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)26-30
Number of pages5
JournalOperative Dentistry
Volume24
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 1999

Fingerprint

Composite Resins
Elastic Modulus
General Practice
Adhesives
Tooth
Randomized Controlled Trials
Clinical Trials
Scotchbond Multi-Purpose
Silux Plus

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Retention of microfilled and hybrid resin-based composite in noncarious Class 5 lesions : a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. / Browning, W. D.; Brackett, W. W.; Gilpatrick, R. O.

In: Operative Dentistry, Vol. 24, No. 1, 01.01.1999, p. 26-30.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2abacfdddfa64351a17207d0650de7b2,
title = "Retention of microfilled and hybrid resin-based composite in noncarious Class 5 lesions: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial.",
abstract = "This double-blind clinical trial was undertaken to compare the retention rate of restorative materials with contrasting stiffness in noncarious class 5 lesions. All restorations were placed using retraction cord and cotton roll isolation to more closely mimic the general practice setting. Thirty subjects with at least two lesions were recruited to participate in the study. Each subject received one restoration using Silux Plus and one using Z100. The assignment of material was randomized, and the subjects were unaware of which tooth had received which material. All restorations were placed with a fourth-generation adhesive liner, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose. Evaluations were performed at baseline, 6, and 12 months by two independent examiners unaware of the restoration's group identity. The restorations were evaluated using criteria developed by Cvar and Ryge in a forced-consensus model. Despite the fact that the two materials have widely different elastic modulus values, after 12 months no difference between the retention rates for the two groups was found, and both groups of restorations performed very well.",
author = "Browning, {W. D.} and Brackett, {W. W.} and Gilpatrick, {R. O.}",
year = "1999",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "26--30",
journal = "Operative Dentistry",
issn = "0361-7734",
publisher = "Indiana University School of Dentistry",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Retention of microfilled and hybrid resin-based composite in noncarious Class 5 lesions

T2 - a double-blind, randomized clinical trial.

AU - Browning, W. D.

AU - Brackett, W. W.

AU - Gilpatrick, R. O.

PY - 1999/1/1

Y1 - 1999/1/1

N2 - This double-blind clinical trial was undertaken to compare the retention rate of restorative materials with contrasting stiffness in noncarious class 5 lesions. All restorations were placed using retraction cord and cotton roll isolation to more closely mimic the general practice setting. Thirty subjects with at least two lesions were recruited to participate in the study. Each subject received one restoration using Silux Plus and one using Z100. The assignment of material was randomized, and the subjects were unaware of which tooth had received which material. All restorations were placed with a fourth-generation adhesive liner, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose. Evaluations were performed at baseline, 6, and 12 months by two independent examiners unaware of the restoration's group identity. The restorations were evaluated using criteria developed by Cvar and Ryge in a forced-consensus model. Despite the fact that the two materials have widely different elastic modulus values, after 12 months no difference between the retention rates for the two groups was found, and both groups of restorations performed very well.

AB - This double-blind clinical trial was undertaken to compare the retention rate of restorative materials with contrasting stiffness in noncarious class 5 lesions. All restorations were placed using retraction cord and cotton roll isolation to more closely mimic the general practice setting. Thirty subjects with at least two lesions were recruited to participate in the study. Each subject received one restoration using Silux Plus and one using Z100. The assignment of material was randomized, and the subjects were unaware of which tooth had received which material. All restorations were placed with a fourth-generation adhesive liner, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose. Evaluations were performed at baseline, 6, and 12 months by two independent examiners unaware of the restoration's group identity. The restorations were evaluated using criteria developed by Cvar and Ryge in a forced-consensus model. Despite the fact that the two materials have widely different elastic modulus values, after 12 months no difference between the retention rates for the two groups was found, and both groups of restorations performed very well.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032618674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032618674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10337295

AN - SCOPUS:0032618674

VL - 24

SP - 26

EP - 30

JO - Operative Dentistry

JF - Operative Dentistry

SN - 0361-7734

IS - 1

ER -