Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study

Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study

To compare and evaluate the retention along with antibacterial efficacy of colored compomer and glass hybrid bulk fill glass ionomer restorative material as a conservative adhesive restoration in children of age 6-12 years. Sixty children were selected fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry 2020, Vol.13 (Suppl 1), p.S45-S54
Hauptverfasser: Mundada, Madhura V, Hugar, Shivayogi M, Hallikerimath, Seema, Davalbhakta, Rucha, Gokhale, Niraj S, Shah, Shreyas V
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Original
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page S54
container_issue Suppl 1
container_start_page S45
container_title International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry
container_volume 13
creator Mundada, Madhura V
Hugar, Shivayogi M
Hallikerimath, Seema
Davalbhakta, Rucha
Gokhale, Niraj S
Shah, Shreyas V
description To compare and evaluate the retention along with antibacterial efficacy of colored compomer and glass hybrid bulk fill glass ionomer restorative material as a conservative adhesive restoration in children of age 6-12 years. Sixty children were selected fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria falling in the age group of 6-12 years with mixed dentition and two groups were formed: group I-colored compomer and group II-glass hybrid bulk fill material. Initially, oral prophylaxis was carried out and baseline collection of saliva was completed. Then, the restorative treatment was completed. Retention of the material and antibacterial count [colony-forming units (CFU)/mL of saliva] was estimated at 1, 3, and 6 months after the restorative procedure. It was seen that retention rate with glass hybrid bulk fill group was 100%, whereas with colored compomer group it was 90% at end of 6 months. Although good antibacterial activity was shown by both the group at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up but statistically significant drop was seen in the glass hybrid bulk fill group at 3-month intervals than the colored compomer group with a value of 0.0001 ( < 0.05). Among both the materials, glass hybrid bulk fill restorative material showed good retention compared to Colored compomer material but it was not statistically very significant. Also, both the materials have shown good antimicrobial activity at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up. Mundada MV, Hugar SM, Hallikerimath S, Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(S-1):S45-S54.
doi_str_mv 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1866
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmed_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8359895</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>34434014</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2766-971ce6deda000f03894407d078da736739bec4ac0405d5c0cf272f872ba293543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUl1v1DAQDAhEq1LxDyr_AYOTOHHygnRcrx9SK1ApvFqO7fR8OHZkJynHr2dzdz3Bk8femdlda5LkIiUfC0KKT5seb_wYnLARpwRecFqV5evklNQMcE3omx2mmJEiO0nOYzQNoZTRrKzYu-QkpzSnJKWnrz4sfdeLIAYzabSahB0Beod8ix70oN3uIpxCC4CNkIMORli0alsjhdzOvNnBdzrsaNdWxIhutk0wCn0Z7S90ZawFrzj4Q5d7cTAREQlQu6jDtC8t1FrHGRz50N04tFwbq4J26NkMa3RvfmuFLufhZgJeOHTr0E8zefT47LEIHfoGK1mrLX4KfuzRpR8bq3FjjVMgfYBJfWf-AIT2Q_BAVej7MKrt--RtC9-qzw_nWfLjavW4vMF3X69vl4s7LDNWlrhmqdQleAn4_pbkVU0pYYqwSgmWlyyvGy2pkISSQhWSyDZjWVuxrBFZnRc0P0s-7337sem0krAMTMz7YDoRttwLw_-vOLPmT37iVV7UVV2AQbk3kMHHGHR71KaEzynhm56_pITvUsLnlIDw4t_OR9lLJvK_8m3DaQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Mundada, Madhura V ; Hugar, Shivayogi M ; Hallikerimath, Seema ; Davalbhakta, Rucha ; Gokhale, Niraj S ; Shah, Shreyas V</creator><creatorcontrib>Mundada, Madhura V ; Hugar, Shivayogi M ; Hallikerimath, Seema ; Davalbhakta, Rucha ; Gokhale, Niraj S ; Shah, Shreyas V</creatorcontrib><description>To compare and evaluate the retention along with antibacterial efficacy of colored compomer and glass hybrid bulk fill glass ionomer restorative material as a conservative adhesive restoration in children of age 6-12 years. Sixty children were selected fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria falling in the age group of 6-12 years with mixed dentition and two groups were formed: group I-colored compomer and group II-glass hybrid bulk fill material. Initially, oral prophylaxis was carried out and baseline collection of saliva was completed. Then, the restorative treatment was completed. Retention of the material and antibacterial count [colony-forming units (CFU)/mL of saliva] was estimated at 1, 3, and 6 months after the restorative procedure. It was seen that retention rate with glass hybrid bulk fill group was 100%, whereas with colored compomer group it was 90% at end of 6 months. Although good antibacterial activity was shown by both the group at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up but statistically significant drop was seen in the glass hybrid bulk fill group at 3-month intervals than the colored compomer group with a value of 0.0001 ( &lt; 0.05). Among both the materials, glass hybrid bulk fill restorative material showed good retention compared to Colored compomer material but it was not statistically very significant. Also, both the materials have shown good antimicrobial activity at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up. Mundada MV, Hugar SM, Hallikerimath S, Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(S-1):S45-S54.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0974-7052</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 0975-1904</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1866</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34434014</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>India: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers</publisher><subject>Original</subject><ispartof>International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 2020, Vol.13 (Suppl 1), p.S45-S54</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. 2020</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2766-971ce6deda000f03894407d078da736739bec4ac0405d5c0cf272f872ba293543</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8359895/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8359895/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,725,778,782,883,4012,27906,27907,27908,53774,53776</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34434014$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mundada, Madhura V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hugar, Shivayogi M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hallikerimath, Seema</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davalbhakta, Rucha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gokhale, Niraj S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shah, Shreyas V</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study</title><title>International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry</title><addtitle>Int J Clin Pediatr Dent</addtitle><description>To compare and evaluate the retention along with antibacterial efficacy of colored compomer and glass hybrid bulk fill glass ionomer restorative material as a conservative adhesive restoration in children of age 6-12 years. Sixty children were selected fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria falling in the age group of 6-12 years with mixed dentition and two groups were formed: group I-colored compomer and group II-glass hybrid bulk fill material. Initially, oral prophylaxis was carried out and baseline collection of saliva was completed. Then, the restorative treatment was completed. Retention of the material and antibacterial count [colony-forming units (CFU)/mL of saliva] was estimated at 1, 3, and 6 months after the restorative procedure. It was seen that retention rate with glass hybrid bulk fill group was 100%, whereas with colored compomer group it was 90% at end of 6 months. Although good antibacterial activity was shown by both the group at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up but statistically significant drop was seen in the glass hybrid bulk fill group at 3-month intervals than the colored compomer group with a value of 0.0001 ( &lt; 0.05). Among both the materials, glass hybrid bulk fill restorative material showed good retention compared to Colored compomer material but it was not statistically very significant. Also, both the materials have shown good antimicrobial activity at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up. Mundada MV, Hugar SM, Hallikerimath S, Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(S-1):S45-S54.</description><subject>Original</subject><issn>0974-7052</issn><issn>0975-1904</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVUl1v1DAQDAhEq1LxDyr_AYOTOHHygnRcrx9SK1ApvFqO7fR8OHZkJynHr2dzdz3Bk8femdlda5LkIiUfC0KKT5seb_wYnLARpwRecFqV5evklNQMcE3omx2mmJEiO0nOYzQNoZTRrKzYu-QkpzSnJKWnrz4sfdeLIAYzabSahB0Beod8ix70oN3uIpxCC4CNkIMORli0alsjhdzOvNnBdzrsaNdWxIhutk0wCn0Z7S90ZawFrzj4Q5d7cTAREQlQu6jDtC8t1FrHGRz50N04tFwbq4J26NkMa3RvfmuFLufhZgJeOHTr0E8zefT47LEIHfoGK1mrLX4KfuzRpR8bq3FjjVMgfYBJfWf-AIT2Q_BAVej7MKrt--RtC9-qzw_nWfLjavW4vMF3X69vl4s7LDNWlrhmqdQleAn4_pbkVU0pYYqwSgmWlyyvGy2pkISSQhWSyDZjWVuxrBFZnRc0P0s-7337sem0krAMTMz7YDoRttwLw_-vOLPmT37iVV7UVV2AQbk3kMHHGHR71KaEzynhm56_pITvUsLnlIDw4t_OR9lLJvK_8m3DaQ</recordid><startdate>2020</startdate><enddate>2020</enddate><creator>Mundada, Madhura V</creator><creator>Hugar, Shivayogi M</creator><creator>Hallikerimath, Seema</creator><creator>Davalbhakta, Rucha</creator><creator>Gokhale, Niraj S</creator><creator>Shah, Shreyas V</creator><general>Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2020</creationdate><title>Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study</title><author>Mundada, Madhura V ; Hugar, Shivayogi M ; Hallikerimath, Seema ; Davalbhakta, Rucha ; Gokhale, Niraj S ; Shah, Shreyas V</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2766-971ce6deda000f03894407d078da736739bec4ac0405d5c0cf272f872ba293543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Original</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mundada, Madhura V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hugar, Shivayogi M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hallikerimath, Seema</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davalbhakta, Rucha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gokhale, Niraj S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shah, Shreyas V</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mundada, Madhura V</au><au>Hugar, Shivayogi M</au><au>Hallikerimath, Seema</au><au>Davalbhakta, Rucha</au><au>Gokhale, Niraj S</au><au>Shah, Shreyas V</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study</atitle><jtitle>International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Clin Pediatr Dent</addtitle><date>2020</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>Suppl 1</issue><spage>S45</spage><epage>S54</epage><pages>S45-S54</pages><issn>0974-7052</issn><eissn>0975-1904</eissn><abstract>To compare and evaluate the retention along with antibacterial efficacy of colored compomer and glass hybrid bulk fill glass ionomer restorative material as a conservative adhesive restoration in children of age 6-12 years. Sixty children were selected fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria falling in the age group of 6-12 years with mixed dentition and two groups were formed: group I-colored compomer and group II-glass hybrid bulk fill material. Initially, oral prophylaxis was carried out and baseline collection of saliva was completed. Then, the restorative treatment was completed. Retention of the material and antibacterial count [colony-forming units (CFU)/mL of saliva] was estimated at 1, 3, and 6 months after the restorative procedure. It was seen that retention rate with glass hybrid bulk fill group was 100%, whereas with colored compomer group it was 90% at end of 6 months. Although good antibacterial activity was shown by both the group at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up but statistically significant drop was seen in the glass hybrid bulk fill group at 3-month intervals than the colored compomer group with a value of 0.0001 ( &lt; 0.05). Among both the materials, glass hybrid bulk fill restorative material showed good retention compared to Colored compomer material but it was not statistically very significant. Also, both the materials have shown good antimicrobial activity at 1, 3, and 6 months follow-up. Mundada MV, Hugar SM, Hallikerimath S, Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(S-1):S45-S54.</abstract><cop>India</cop><pub>Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers</pub><pmid>34434014</pmid><doi>10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1866</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0974-7052
ispartof International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 2020, Vol.13 (Suppl 1), p.S45-S54
issn 0974-7052
0975-1904
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8359895
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central
subjects Original
title Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T12%3A09%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20Evaluation%20of%20Retention%20and%20Antibacterial%20Efficacy%20of%20Compomer%20and%20Glass%20Hybrid%20Bulk%20Fill%20Restorative%20Material%20as%20a%20Conservative%20Adhesive%20Restoration%20in%20Children%20with%20Mixed%20Dentition-An%20In%20Vivo%20Two-arm%20Parallel-group%20Double-blinded%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Study&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20clinical%20pediatric%20dentistry&rft.au=Mundada,%20Madhura%20V&rft.date=2020&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=Suppl%201&rft.spage=S45&rft.epage=S54&rft.pages=S45-S54&rft.issn=0974-7052&rft.eissn=0975-1904&rft_id=info:doi/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1866&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed_cross%3E34434014%3C/pubmed_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/34434014&rfr_iscdi=true