To compare and evaluate water resistant giomer based and water loving pit and fissure sealants ,inside mouth

Clinical and comparative evaluation of hydrophobic giomer based and hydrophillic pit and fissure sealants -an in vivo study - pit and fissure sealants

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 4

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2024/05/066697

Enrollment

138

Registered

2024-05-03

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2024-05-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: 8- Other Procedures

Interventions

Intervention1: Hydrophillic pit and fissure sealants: In group 1 hydrophillic sealant is used with and without bonding agents. Intervention2: Hydrophillic Sealant: In group 1 Hydrophillic sealant will

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Fully erupted non carious permanent molar contralateral and ipsilateral molars no history of any fluoride application from last 6 months of sealant application children with high risk of caries presents of bilateral maxillary and mandibular molars

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Un-cooperative children children of parents who are not willing to participate

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Hydrophillic pit and fissure sealants will significantly show higher rate of retention ,marginal integrity and anatomic form as compared to hydrophobic pit and fissure sealants after 6 months on permanent molarsTimepoint: baseline	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Hydrophillic and hydrophobic pit and fissure sealants will show same retention, marginal integrity and anatomic form after 6 months of follow upTimepoint: baseline	—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr. Ema Joy

Maharishi Markandeshwar College of Dental Sciences and Research

pshahi@mmumullana.org8146379910

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026