Dental CariesGISNCT02616198
6-year Clinical Evaluation of Glass Ionomer Cements (GIS) With Resin Coating on Posterior Teeth
A study testing EquiaFil G-coat, EquiaFil Fuji Varnish and Riva SC G-coat in people with Dental Caries, run by Ege University.
Trial summary
The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of two highly viscous encapsulated GICs (EquiaFil and Riva SC) covered with two different coatings (Equia Coat and Fuji Varnish) over 6-year using modified United State Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 17 to 55 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Dental Caries
- What is being tested?
- EquiaFil G-coat, EquiaFil Fuji Varnish and Riva SC G-coat
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 54 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jan 2009to Sep 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 17 to 55 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- having good oral hygiene;
- need for at least two or more posterior restorations in contact with neighbouring tooth and in occlusion with antagonist teeth;
- teeth planned to be restore should be vital and symptomless;
- the cavity isthmus size should be more than 1/3 of the intercuspal distance.
Who cannot join
- absence of adjacent and antagonist teeth;
- teeth with periodontal problems;
- teeth with preoperative pain or pulpal inflammations;
- teeth formerly subjected to direct pulp capping;
- patients having severe systemic diseases, allergies or adverse medical history.
About this study
Official title: A Prospective 6-year Clinical Study Evaluating Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cements With Resin Coating on Posterior Teeth
The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of two highly viscous encapsulated GICs (EquiaFil and Riva SC) covered with two different coatings (Equia Coat and Fuji Varnish) over 6-year using modified United State Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.
A total of 256 restorations were made with EquiaFil and Riva SC. Equia Coat or Fuji Varnish was used randomly on the surface of the restorations. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18 months and 6 years after placement using modified USPHS criteria. The results were evaluated with Pearson Chi-Square and Mann Whitney U-test (p< 0.05).
Read the detailed description
The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of two highly viscous encapsulated GICs (EquiaFil and Riva SC) covered with two different coatings (Equia Coat and Fuji Varnish) over 6-year using modified United State Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.
Fifty-four patients having Class I and II restorations/caries were included in the study. A total of 256 restorations were made with EquiaFil (GC Corp, Japan) and Riva SC (SDI, Australia). Equia Coat or Fuji Varnish was used randomly on the surface of the restorations. After cavity preparations, the teeth were randomly restored with one glass ionomer cement and coated with Equia Coat or Fuji Varnish. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18 months and 6 years after placement using modified USPHS criteria. Two evaluators checked color-match, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, caries formation, anatomical form, postoperative sensitivity and retention rate and photographs were taken at each recalls. The results were evaluated with Pearson Chi-Square and Mann Whitney U-test (p< 0.05).
The 18-month results were presented at the CED IADR congress iheld in Barcelona in 2010 (Turkun LS, \& Kanic O ,Clinical evaluation of new glass ionomer coating combined systems for 18-months Journal of Dental Research 89 (Special Issue B) Abstract #402.) Gurgan S et al. also mentioned our 18-month results in their published manuscript ( Gurgan S,Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas ZZ \& Cakir FY (2015) Four-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system Operative Dentistry 40(2) 134-143).
- Conditions
- Dental Caries
- Being tested
- EquiaFil G-coat, EquiaFil Fuji Varnish, Riva SC G-coat, Riva SC Fuji Varnish
- Keywords
- glass ionomers, surface coating, clinical trial
- Medical subject headings
- Dental Caries
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
EquiaFil G-coatOther
The old restorations or new caries were removed with anaesthetic solutions when necessary, a matrix was applied for two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with EquiaFil in bulk after mixing 10 sec. in the mixing machine. After 2min 30 sec, the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated with G-coat and light cured for 10 sec. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria.
EquiaFil Fuji VarnishOther
The old restorations or carious lesions were removed with anaesthetic solutions when necessary, a matrix was applied for two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with EquiaFil in bulk after mixing in the mixing machine. After 2min 30 sec, the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated in 2 layers of Fuji Varnish. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria.
Riva SC G-coatOther
The old restorations or carious lesions were removed and a sectional matrix was applied for two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with Riva SC in bulk after mixing 10 sec. in the mixing machine. The glass ionomer was packed with hand instruments in the cavities and 2min after the first setting the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated with G-coat resin and light cured for 10 sec. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria.
Riva SC Fuji VarnishOther
The caries lesions were removed with diamond and stainless steel burs, a sectional matrix was applied for restoring two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with Riva SC in bulk after mixing 10 sec. in the mixing machine. After the first setting of 2min, the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated in 2 layers with Fuji Varnish. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| EquiaFil G-coat | Active comparator | EquiaFil G-coat combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored Receives: Other: EquiaFil Fuji Varnish; Other: Riva SC G-coat; Other: Riva SC Fuji Varnish |
| EquiaFil Fuji Varnish | Active comparator | EquiaFil Fuji Varnish combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored Receives: Other: EquiaFil G-coat; Other: Riva SC G-coat; Other: Riva SC Fuji Varnish |
| Riva SC G-coat | Active comparator | River SC G-coat combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored Receives: Other: EquiaFil G-coat; Other: EquiaFil Fuji Varnish; Other: Riva SC Fuji Varnish |
| Riva SC Fuji Varnish | Active comparator | River SC Fuji Varnish combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored Receives: Other: EquiaFil G-coat; Other: EquiaFil Fuji Varnish; Other: Riva SC G-coat |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation by 2 independent evaluators
Marginal adaptation was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1: Harmonious outline Alpha 2: Marginal gap (max 100µ) with discoloration (removable) Bravo: Marginal gap (> 100µ) with discoloration (unremovable) Charlie: The restoration is fractured or missed
Measured: 6 years
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal discolouration by 2 independent evaluators
Marginal discolouration was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha: No discoloration anywhere along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth.
Bravo: Slight discoloration along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth.
Charlie: The discoloration penetrated along the margin of the restorative material in a pulpal direction.
Measured: 6 years
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding retention rate by 2 independent evaluators
Retention rate was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1:Clinically excellent Alpha 2: Clinically good with slight deviations from ideal performance, correction possible without damage of tooth or restoration Bravo: Clinically sufficient with few defects, corrections or repair of the restoration possible Charlie: Restoration is partially missed Delta: Restoration is totally missed
Measured: 6 years
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding anatomic form by 2 independent evaluators
Anatomic form was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1: Continuous with existing anatomical form Alpha 2: Slightly discontinuous due to some chipping on the proximal ridge Bravo: Discontinuous with existing anatomical form due to material loss but proximal contact still present Charlie: Proximal contact is lost with ridge fracture
Measured: 6 years
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding colour changes by 2 independent evaluators
Colour changes was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha: The restoration matches the adjacent tooth structure in color and translucency.
Bravo: Light mismatch in color, shade or translucency between the restoration and the adjacent tooth.
Charlie: The mismatch in color and translucency is outside the acceptable range of tooth color and translucency.
Measured: 6 years
Secondary outcomes (1)
Effects of resin coating on the performance of glass ionomer cements according to the United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation, marginal discolouration, retention rate, and colour changes by 2 independent evaluators
The effect of different coatings on the clinical performance of the different glass ionomers tested was evaluated with United State Public Health Service criteria at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6-years. For the evaluation 2 independent evaluators using dental problem and mirrors evaluated the resin coatings according to their retention, marginal adaptation, marginal discolouration, and colour match. There were 4 evaluation scores. Alpha meaning a perfect resin coating, Bravo meaning a coating partially effective but still clinically acceptable and Charlie and Delta meaning that the coating was partially to totally missed.
Measured: 6 years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Nov 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2009
- Primary completionSep 2009
- Study completionSep 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Dental CariesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Ege UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 54 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ege University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Sebnem Turkun, Ege University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02616198
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 08-10.1/6
- Acronym
- GIS
- Status last verified
- Nov 2015
- First submitted
- 20 Nov 2015
- Last updated
- 26 Nov 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Sidhu SK. Glass-ionomer cement restorative materials: a sticky subject? Aust Dent J. 2011 Jun;56 Suppl 1:23-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01293.x.
PubMed 21564113Lohbauer U (2010) Dental glass ionomer cements as permanent filling materials? Properties, limitations and future trends. Materials 3(1) 76-96.
Diem VT, Tyas MJ, Ngo HC, Phuong LH, Khanh ND. The effect of a nano-filled resin coating on the 3-year clinical performance of a conventional high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement. Clin Oral Investig. 2014 Apr;18(3):753-9. doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-1026-z. Epub 2013 Jul 7.
PubMed 23832616Tyas MJ. Clinical evaluation of glass-ionomer cement restorations. J Appl Oral Sci. 2006;14 Suppl:10-3. doi: 10.1590/s1678-77572006000700003.
PubMed 19089080Frankenberger R, Garcia-Godoy F, Kramer N. Clinical Performance of Viscous Glass Ionomer Cement in Posterior Cavities over Two Years. Int J Dent. 2009;2009:781462. doi: 10.1155/2009/781462. Epub 2010 Feb 22.
PubMed 20339470Ersin NK, Candan U, Aykut A, Oncag O, Eronat C, Kose T. A clinical evaluation of resin-based composite and glass ionomer cement restorations placed in primary teeth using the ART approach: results at 24 months. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Nov;137(11):1529-36. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0087.
PubMed 17082278Burke FJ, Siddons C, Cripps S, Bardha J, Crisp RJ, Dopheide B. Clinical performance of reinforced glass ionomer restorations placed in UK dental practices. Br Dent J. 2007 Jul 14;203(1):E2; discussion 40-1. doi: 10.1038/bdj.2007.529. Epub 2007 Jun 1.
PubMed 17546060Bonifacio CC, Werner A, Kleverlaan CJ. Coating glass-ionomer cements with a nanofilled resin. Acta Odontol Scand. 2012 Dec;70(6):471-7. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2011.639307. Epub 2011 Dec 12.
PubMed 22149968Friedl K, Hiller KA, Friedl KH. Clinical performance of a new glass ionomer based restoration system: a retrospective cohort study. Dent Mater. 2011 Oct;27(10):1031-7. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.07.004. Epub 2011 Aug 15.
PubMed 21840585Basso M, Brambilla E, Benites MG, Giovannardi M & Ionescu AC (2015) Glass ionomer cement for permanent dental restorations: a 48-months, multi-center, prospective clinical trial Stomatology Education Journal 2(1) 25-35.
Miletic I, Baraba A, Juic IB & Anic I (2013) Evaluation of a glass-ionomer based restoration system- a one year pilot study Journal of Minimum Intervention in Dentistry 6 87-95.
Gurgan S, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas SS, Cakir FY. Four-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system. Oper Dent. 2015 Mar-Apr;40(2):134-43. doi: 10.2341/13-239-C. Epub 2014 Oct 9.
PubMed 25299703
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Nov 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Prospective 6-year Clinical Study Evaluating Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cements With Resin Coating on Posterior Teeth
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02616198
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- GIS / 08-10.1/6
- Conditions
- Dental Caries
- Keywords
- glass ionomers, surface coating, clinical trial
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 54 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ege UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2009
- Primary completion
- Sep 2009 (actual)
- Study completion
- Sep 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Nov 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of two highly viscous encapsulated GICs (EquiaFil and Riva SC) covered with two different coatings (Equia Coat and Fuji Varnish) over 6-year using modified United State Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.
A total of 256 restorations were made with EquiaFil and Riva SC. Equia Coat or Fuji Varnish was used randomly on the surface of the restorations. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18 months and 6 years after placement using modified USPHS criteria. The results were evaluated with Pearson Chi-Square and Mann Whitney U-test (p< 0.05).
Detailed description
The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of two highly viscous encapsulated GICs (EquiaFil and Riva SC) covered with two different coatings (Equia Coat and Fuji Varnish) over 6-year using modified United State Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.
Fifty-four patients having Class I and II restorations/caries were included in the study. A total of 256 restorations were made with EquiaFil (GC Corp, Japan) and Riva SC (SDI, Australia). Equia Coat or Fuji Varnish was used randomly on the surface of the restorations. After cavity preparations, the teeth were randomly restored with one glass ionomer cement and coated with Equia Coat or Fuji Varnish. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18 months and 6 years after placement using modified USPHS criteria. Two evaluators checked color-match, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, caries formation, anatomical form, postoperative sensitivity and retention rate and photographs were taken at each recalls. The results were evaluated with Pearson Chi-Square and Mann Whitney U-test (p< 0.05).
The 18-month results were presented at the CED IADR congress iheld in Barcelona in 2010 (Turkun LS, \& Kanic O ,Clinical evaluation of new glass ionomer coating combined systems for 18-months Journal of Dental Research 89 (Special Issue B) Abstract #402.) Gurgan S et al. also mentioned our 18-month results in their published manuscript ( Gurgan S,Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas ZZ \& Cakir FY (2015) Four-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system Operative Dentistry 40(2) 134-143).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| EquiaFil G-coat | Active comparator | Other: EquiaFil Fuji Varnish, Other: Riva SC G-coat, Other: Riva SC Fuji VarnishEquiaFil G-coat combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored |
| EquiaFil Fuji Varnish | Active comparator | Other: EquiaFil G-coat, Other: Riva SC G-coat, Other: Riva SC Fuji VarnishEquiaFil Fuji Varnish combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored |
| Riva SC G-coat | Active comparator | Other: EquiaFil G-coat, Other: EquiaFil Fuji Varnish, Other: Riva SC Fuji VarnishRiver SC G-coat combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored |
| Riva SC Fuji Varnish | Active comparator | Other: EquiaFil G-coat, Other: EquiaFil Fuji Varnish, Other: Riva SC G-coatRiver SC Fuji Varnish combination was applied on one randomly selected cavity to be restored |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 17 to 55 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- having good oral hygiene;
- need for at least two or more posterior restorations in contact with neighbouring tooth and in occlusion with antagonist teeth;
- teeth planned to be restore should be vital and symptomless;
- the cavity isthmus size should be more than 1/3 of the intercuspal distance.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- absence of adjacent and antagonist teeth;
- teeth with periodontal problems;
- teeth with preoperative pain or pulpal inflammations;
- teeth formerly subjected to direct pulp capping;
- patients having severe systemic diseases, allergies or adverse medical history.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| EquiaFil G-coatThe old restorations or new caries were removed with anaesthetic solutions when necessary, a matrix was applied for two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with EquiaFil in bulk after mixing 10 sec. in the mixing machine. After 2min 30 sec, the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated with G-coat and light cured for 10 sec. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria. | Other | EquiaFil Fuji Varnish, Riva SC Fuji Varnish, Riva SC G-coat |
| EquiaFil Fuji VarnishThe old restorations or carious lesions were removed with anaesthetic solutions when necessary, a matrix was applied for two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with EquiaFil in bulk after mixing in the mixing machine. After 2min 30 sec, the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated in 2 layers of Fuji Varnish. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria. | Other | EquiaFil G-coat, Riva SC Fuji Varnish, Riva SC G-coat |
| Riva SC G-coatThe old restorations or carious lesions were removed and a sectional matrix was applied for two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with Riva SC in bulk after mixing 10 sec. in the mixing machine. The glass ionomer was packed with hand instruments in the cavities and 2min after the first setting the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated with G-coat resin and light cured for 10 sec. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria. | Other | EquiaFil Fuji Varnish, EquiaFil G-coat, Riva SC Fuji Varnish |
| Riva SC Fuji VarnishThe caries lesions were removed with diamond and stainless steel burs, a sectional matrix was applied for restoring two surface cavities and the restoration was performed with Riva SC in bulk after mixing 10 sec. in the mixing machine. After the first setting of 2min, the restoration was contoured and the occlusion adjusted.Then the surface was coated in 2 layers with Fuji Varnish. The restorations were controlled by 2 independent examiners at baseline, 6-12-18 months and 6 years according to the United State Public Health Service criteria. | Other | EquiaFil Fuji Varnish, EquiaFil G-coat, Riva SC G-coat |
Primary outcome
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation by 2 independent evaluators
Time frame: 6 years
Marginal adaptation was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1: Harmonious outline Alpha 2: Marginal gap (max 100µ) with discoloration (removable) Bravo: Marginal gap (> 100µ) with discoloration (unremovable) Charlie: The restoration is fractured or missed
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal discolouration by 2 independent evaluators
Time frame: 6 years
Marginal discolouration was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha: No discoloration anywhere along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth. Bravo: Slight discoloration along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth. Charlie: The discoloration penetrated along the margin of the restorative material in a pulpal direction.
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding retention rate by 2 independent evaluators
Time frame: 6 years
Retention rate was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1:Clinically excellent Alpha 2: Clinically good with slight deviations from ideal performance, correction possible without damage of tooth or restoration Bravo: Clinically sufficient with few defects, corrections or repair of the restoration possible Charlie: Restoration is partially missed Delta: Restoration is totally missed
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding anatomic form by 2 independent evaluators
Time frame: 6 years
Anatomic form was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1: Continuous with existing anatomical form Alpha 2: Slightly discontinuous due to some chipping on the proximal ridge Bravo: Discontinuous with existing anatomical form due to material loss but proximal contact still present Charlie: Proximal contact is lost with ridge fracture
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding colour changes by 2 independent evaluators
Time frame: 6 years
Colour changes was evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha: The restoration matches the adjacent tooth structure in color and translucency. Bravo: Light mismatch in color, shade or translucency between the restoration and the adjacent tooth. Charlie: The mismatch in color and translucency is outside the acceptable range of tooth color and translucency.
1 secondary outcome
Effects of resin coating on the performance of glass ionomer cements according to the United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation, marginal discolouration, retention rate, and colour changes by 2 independent evaluators
Time frame: 6 years
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Nov 2015.
- Background: PubMed 21564113Sidhu SK. Glass-ionomer cement restorative materials: a sticky subject? Aust Dent J. 2011 Jun;56 Suppl 1:23-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01293.x.
- BackgroundLohbauer U (2010) Dental glass ionomer cements as permanent filling materials? Properties, limitations and future trends. Materials 3(1) 76-96.
- Background: PubMed 23832616Diem VT, Tyas MJ, Ngo HC, Phuong LH, Khanh ND. The effect of a nano-filled resin coating on the 3-year clinical performance of a conventional high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement. Clin Oral Investig. 2014 Apr;18(3):753-9. doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-1026-z. Epub 2013 Jul 7.
- Background: PubMed 19089080Tyas MJ. Clinical evaluation of glass-ionomer cement restorations. J Appl Oral Sci. 2006;14 Suppl:10-3. doi: 10.1590/s1678-77572006000700003.
- Background: PubMed 20339470Frankenberger R, Garcia-Godoy F, Kramer N. Clinical Performance of Viscous Glass Ionomer Cement in Posterior Cavities over Two Years. Int J Dent. 2009;2009:781462. doi: 10.1155/2009/781462. Epub 2010 Feb 22.
- Background: PubMed 17082278Ersin NK, Candan U, Aykut A, Oncag O, Eronat C, Kose T. A clinical evaluation of resin-based composite and glass ionomer cement restorations placed in primary teeth using the ART approach: results at 24 months. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Nov;137(11):1529-36. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0087.
- Background: PubMed 17546060Burke FJ, Siddons C, Cripps S, Bardha J, Crisp RJ, Dopheide B. Clinical performance of reinforced glass ionomer restorations placed in UK dental practices. Br Dent J. 2007 Jul 14;203(1):E2; discussion 40-1. doi: 10.1038/bdj.2007.529. Epub 2007 Jun 1.
- Background: PubMed 22149968Bonifacio CC, Werner A, Kleverlaan CJ. Coating glass-ionomer cements with a nanofilled resin. Acta Odontol Scand. 2012 Dec;70(6):471-7. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2011.639307. Epub 2011 Dec 12.
- Background: PubMed 21840585Friedl K, Hiller KA, Friedl KH. Clinical performance of a new glass ionomer based restoration system: a retrospective cohort study. Dent Mater. 2011 Oct;27(10):1031-7. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.07.004. Epub 2011 Aug 15.
- BackgroundBasso M, Brambilla E, Benites MG, Giovannardi M & Ionescu AC (2015) Glass ionomer cement for permanent dental restorations: a 48-months, multi-center, prospective clinical trial Stomatology Education Journal 2(1) 25-35.
- BackgroundMiletic I, Baraba A, Juic IB & Anic I (2013) Evaluation of a glass-ionomer based restoration system- a one year pilot study Journal of Minimum Intervention in Dentistry 6 87-95.
- Background: PubMed 25299703Gurgan S, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas SS, Cakir FY. Four-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system. Oper Dent. 2015 Mar-Apr;40(2):134-43. doi: 10.2341/13-239-C. Epub 2014 Oct 9.
Related trials for Dental Caries
Active, not recruiting
Clinical Evaluation of a New Dual-cure Universal Adhesive
Class I Dental Restorations, Class II Dental Restorations
Not yet recruiting
Safety of Intraosseous Anaesthesia in Children With Haemophilia
Haemophilia A, Haemophilia B
Not yet recruiting
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Silver Diamine Fluoride Versus Light-Cured Silver Diamine Fluoride in Carious Primary Molars
Dental Caries
Not yet recruiting
Clinical Performance of CAD/CAM Hard Hybrid Ceramic Inlays Versus Resin Composite Inlays in Vital Molars With Extensive Occluso-Proximal Cavities
Dental Caries, Cavity, Dental
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Xylitol- Versus Erythritol-Sweetened Mints on Plaque ATP-Bioluminescence Readings
Dental Caries, Dental Plaque
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing EquiaFil G-coat, EquiaFil Fuji Varnish and Riva SC G-coat in people with Dental Caries, run by Ege University.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Nov 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Evaluating differently coated glass ionomer cements on posterior teeth with United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation by 2 independent evaluators (time frame: 6 years). The study lists 5 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02616198, which also lists 12 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Nov 2015.