Evidence-based dentistry · 2024
Comparative evaluation of pit & fissure sealant retention using cotton roll & rubber dam isolation techniques - a systematic review & meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shukla Neha, Akram Zainab, Kumar P G Naveen, Khairnar Mahesh R, Jadhav Sachin Kumar, Priyadarsini Savitha
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Isolation with cotton rolls does not always provide as complete isolation as rubber dam, especially in procedures where absolute moisture control is critical. Therefore, this review aims to summarize and analyze previous studies evaluating the retention and marginal integrity of pit & fissure sealant using rubber dam and cotton roll isolation techniques during dental treatment in children.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, search yielded 1361 articles, with seven RCTs and one non-RCT design meeting the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted on study design, sample size, sealant type, follow-up duration, retention rates, and caries incidence.
RESULTS: The comparison of retention rate between rubber dam and cotton roll at six months difference was non-significant (OR:1.15; p = 0.64) while there was significant difference at 12 month (OR:2.23; p < 0.001). The difference for the marginal integrity was statistically significant at six months (OR:2.00; p = 0.03) while non-significant difference observed (OR:1.74; p = 0.10) at 12 months.
CONCLUSION: The sealant placed using a rubber dam as an isolation technique showed higher retention than the cotton roll after 12 months. In terms of marginal integrity, the performance of the rubber dam and cotton roll was equivalent at the end of 12 months.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, search yielded 1361 articles, with seven RCTs and one non-RCT design meeting the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted on study design, sample size, sealant type, follow-up duration, retention rates, and caries incidence.
RESULTS: The comparison of retention rate between rubber dam and cotton roll at six months difference was non-significant (OR:1.15; p = 0.64) while there was significant difference at 12 month (OR:2.23; p < 0.001). The difference for the marginal integrity was statistically significant at six months (OR:2.00; p = 0.03) while non-significant difference observed (OR:1.74; p = 0.10) at 12 months.
CONCLUSION: The sealant placed using a rubber dam as an isolation technique showed higher retention than the cotton roll after 12 months. In terms of marginal integrity, the performance of the rubber dam and cotton roll was equivalent at the end of 12 months.