Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of class V restorations made by undergraduate students and determine the factors that might influence retention of restorations. Material and Methods: A survey of the clinical records created between 2007 and 2009 was used to collect data on patients with dental restorations. The USPHS (United States Public Health Service) criteria were used to perform evaluations by direct clinical observation. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher’s exact test, Chi-square test, and Logistic regression analysis. Results: Clinical records were analyzed, of which 282 (21.3%) described class V restorations performed on a total of 781 teeth. These patients were contacted, and 67 (23.76%) attended the clinic for assessment. Out of the 221 (28.3%) evaluated teeth, 37 restorations were replaced and 184 were analyzed. The logistic regression analysis showed that gingival bleeding index (GBI), decay-missing-filled teeth (DMFT) index, and pulpal protection influenced the retention of the restorations. The association tests demonstrated superiority of the composite resin over the glass ionomer cement with regard to retention, wear, and anatomical form. Conclusion: In this study, retention of cervical composite resin restorations was higher than that of the glass ionomer cement restorations when performed by undergraduate students.Key Words: Composite resins; Glass ionomer cements; Retrospective study.
Highlights
[3] The etiological factors are diverse and include incorrect habit of brushing, excessive consumption of acidic or carbonated drinks, tension resulting from traumatic occlusion, and carious lesions. [1,4] For non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL), which seem to be more frequently occurring on the buccal surfaces, tooth-colored restoratives should be considered as the materials of choice
[1] This retrospective clinical study compared the clinical performance of composite resin and glass ionomer cement (GIC) class V restorations performed by undergraduate dental students and investigated the factors influencing restoration retention
Among the restorative materials employed for the cervical restorations, composite resin (n = 116, 63.0%) was the most frequently used, followed by GIC (n = 68, 37.0%)
Summary
I n an era when people retain their natural teeth, there is a clear need for the restoration of cervical lesions. [1,2] Approximately 25% of the population presents with cervical injuries, which predominate at an advanced age and typically affect the pre-molar teeth. [3] The etiological factors are diverse and include incorrect habit of brushing, excessive consumption of acidic or carbonated drinks, tension resulting from traumatic occlusion, and carious lesions. [1,4] For non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL), which seem to be more frequently occurring on the buccal surfaces, tooth-colored restoratives should be considered as the materials of choice. [5] These materials typically include composite resin and glass ionomer cement (GIC). [5]The characteristics of glass ionomer as biocompatibility, fluoride release, coefficient of thermal expansion similar to that of natural tooth structure, and the chemical adhesion of GIC make it one of materials of choice for treatment of cervical lesions. [6,1]composite resins are still considered to be suitable for class V direct restorations, because resin-based adhesives have recently shown considerable improvement in retention when used in NCCL restorations. [1] In vitro studies have suggested that current composite resins, in combination with dentin bonding agents, can achieve very high bond strengths. [7] a precise and careful technique is required to achieve the full potential of these materials. [7]The superior performance of composite resins in the context of their high retention rates in class V restorations has been previously reported. [8,9] On the other hand, some investigators have observed better effectiveness of GIC when restoring such cavities; [5,2] others found no significant difference between these two materials. [10,11]Given the variety of materials that has been indicated for the restoration of class V cavities, selection of the optimal method might present a challenge for the clinician. [1] This retrospective clinical study compared the clinical performance of composite resin and GIC class V restorations performed by undergraduate dental students and investigated the factors influencing restoration retention. [1,4] For non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL), which seem to be more frequently occurring on the buccal surfaces, tooth-colored restoratives should be considered as the materials of choice. [5] These materials typically include composite resin and glass ionomer cement (GIC). The characteristics of glass ionomer as biocompatibility, fluoride release, coefficient of thermal expansion similar to that of natural tooth structure, and the chemical adhesion of GIC make it one of materials of choice for treatment of cervical lesions. The superior performance of composite resins in the context of their high retention rates in class V restorations has been previously reported. [1] This retrospective clinical study compared the clinical performance of composite resin and GIC class V restorations performed by undergraduate dental students and investigated the factors influencing restoration retention
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
