Skip to content

Dental sealant quality, chair time, and patients' preference of three isolation techniques

Comparison of the quality of fissure sealant and the preference of pediatric dental patients with three different isolation techniques

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN10452417
Enrollment
48
Registered
2021-05-14
Start date
2018-11-25
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2022-10-24

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

Conditions

Isolation techniques for dental treatment Oral Health

Interventions

Forty-eight children aged 6 - 15 years participated according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. They were randomized by using simple block random allocation to ensure a balanced randomization for each

Sponsors

King Saud University
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Normal healthy patient with ASA 1 according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification 2. Children aged 6 - 15 years, willing to participate in the study 3. Legal guardian accepts the participation of the child in the study 4. Participant must require 4 pits and fissure sealants on all first or second permanent molars with an International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) score of 0 - 2, and 5) Arabic or English speaker children

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Special Needs children 2. Conditions requiring emergency dental treatment (abscess, draining sinus, cellulitis) 3. Partially erupted permanent first or second molars 4. Enamel/Dentin anomalies 5. Uncooperative children, Frankl Behavior Rating Scale of 1 or 2 6. Children with a severe gagging reflex 7. Children allergic to latex 8. Children with recent dental radiographs taken but not available on the computer system

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Measured at a single time point for each technique: 1. Sealants quality was evaluated according to Simonsen’s criteria 2. Sealant chair time was measured using a stopwatch 3. Patients' preference was measured according to a novel validated questionnaire

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
There are no secondary outcome measures

Countries

Saudi Arabia

Contacts

Public ContactRahif Mattar
437204377@student.ksu.edu.sa+966-11 469-7835

Outcome results

None listed

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