FindTrial
Sign In

Evaluation of composite resin restorations and glass ionomer cement by applying differently the adhesive system

Study of the clinical performance of different accession strategies of noncarious cervical lesions restorations

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
REBEC
Registry ID
RBR-655c3z
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2018-07-20
Start date
2014-07-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-10-27

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

Conditions

Excessive attrition of teeth. Abrasion of teeth. Other specified diseases of hard tissues of teeth.

Interventions

200 in total restorations (fillings), were carried out by two operators in 50 patients (n = 50) volunteers aged between 18 and 90 years. Prior to the execution of the restorations, a prophylaxis with
Procedure/surgery
E06.780.346.737.125
K03.0

Sponsors

Universidade Estadual Paulista - Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba
Lead Sponsor
Centro Universitário São Lucas
Collaborator

Eligibility

Age
18 Years to 90 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Age between 18 and 90 years old; regardless of genre; good health; no clinical history of allergies to dental products and remedies; presence of at least 4 non-carious cervical lesions; proper oral hygiene.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Chronic systemic disease; periodontal disease and without treatment; use of orthodontic appliances; severe bruxism, with more than 50% of wear.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Expected outcome 1: It was expected that there would be no statistically significant difference between the four adhesive strategies used using the USPHS (United State Public Health Service) method through visual and tactile inspection, considering a variation of at least 5% in the measurements after the intervention (initial), 12 and 24 months.;Outcome found 1: The four different adhesion strategies in non-carious cervical restorations presented similar clinical performance after the intervention (initial), 12 and 24 months.—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Expected Outcome 2: It was expected that there would be no statistically significant difference between the evaluated times, when the same adhesive strategy was evaluated using the USPHS (United State Public Health Service) method through visual and tactile inspection, considering a variation of at least 5% in measurements immediately after the intervention (initial), 12 and 24 months.;Outcome found 2: For each adhesion strategy in non-carious cervical restorations, there was no change in clinical performance after the intervention (initial), 12 and 24 months.—

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Public ContactPaulo Carvalho

Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba - UNESP

paulo@saolucas.edu.br+55-018-36363347

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP)