Abstract
Two composite resins were evaluated for clinical acceptability as restorative materials in Class I and II cavities over a 2-year-period. In addition, dispersed phase alloy was evaluated for comparison. All restorations were assessed for anatomical form, marginal integrity and marginal leakage using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. At the 2-year recall, 96% of the composites and 100% of the amalgams were rated 'alpha' or 'bravo', using the parameters of assessment defined in this study. However, a significant number of shifts from the baseline, within the level of acceptability, had occurred. The two composites showed the greatest number of shifts for anatomical form and marginal leakage, while there were no differences between the composites and the amalgam for shifts in marginal integrity. Although a very high level of acceptability was determined for all of the materials, the frequency of rating change within categories for the composites was a cause of concern with regard to their long-term clinical use.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
