Postoperative sensitivity Oral Health
Conditions
Interventions
Cavity preparation and restorative procedures: Class I and II cavities were prepared involving at least half of the distance between cusp tips and the pulpal or axial walls were determined 1 ? 1.5mm f
the treatments were used according to the manufacturers? directions. Two previously trained, graduated students prepared and restored the cavities. Eventually, 120 molars and premolars were prepared a
Sponsors
Federal University of Pará (Brazil)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. 18 to 50 years and good health 2. The teeth to be restored had to present opposing and adjacent contacts and not exhibit primary or secondary trauma, excessive clenching, or bruxism 3. Low caries risk and good periodontal health were also necessary
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Continuous use of analgesic and anti-inflammatory drugs 2. Patients under orthodontic treatment 3. Using of total or partial removable prosthodontics
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Non-parametric Kruskall-Wallis analysis was applied to the verified sensitivity results for all adhesive systems within each evaluation period (independent sample), including T0 (the preoperative evaluation), and no significant differences were detected. According to the p-values observed (p=0,53) at each evaluation period, no significant differences could be found. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Friedman non-parametric analysis was also applied to the results obtained for each adhesive system at all the evaluation periods (dependent sample), and the p-values (P>0.05) again showed no significant differences | — |
Countries
Brazil
Outcome results
None listed