MATERIALS AND METHODS: After obtaining consent from the parents and screening the children against the inclusion cum exclusion criteria, 90 school children whose mandibular first molars were caries free and with a well-defined pit and fissure system were recruited for this spilt mouth trial. The respective molars were allocated either to the ART sealant or the embrace group after the randomization process. The sealants were applied according to the manufacturer's instructions and followed up at the end of 3rd, 6th, and 12th month, respectively. The outcome measures assessed were the retention and the caries preventive effects of the materials.
RESULTS: At the end of the 6th month, about one-fourth of the sealants in either group remained totally intact, without evidence of caries. No significant differences were seen between the sealants either in terms of retention or caries preventive benefits at the end of 12 months.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The chi-squared test was used to check differences in proportions. The significance value was set at <0.05. Kappa test was performed to assess the intraexaminer reproducibility with respect to retention and caries status.
CONCLUSION: The moisture-tolerant resin sealant could not replicate the physical properties usually associated with conventional resin sealants. The usage of ART sealants was deemed to be less cumbersome in an outreach setting as observed in this trial.
Materials and Methods: A randomized-controlled split-mouth study was conducted to compare the retention and the caries preventive effect of light-cured resin-based sealant (3M ESPE) and glass ionomer sealant (Fuji VII). The sealants were applied to either the right or the left lower mandibular molars (7-9 yrs of age) in 120 school children, based on the randomization process. They were recalled for assessment of clinical retention at intervals of 3, 6, and 12 months. The caries-preventive effect between the two materials was tested statistically by the McNemar's test for matched pairs, and the differences observed with regard to the retention of the materials was tested by Chi-square tests. The level of significance was set to be at P < 0.05.
Results: At the end of 12th month, sealant retention is found to be higher in the resin-based sealant group compared to the glass ionomer group. In the glass ionomer sealants placed, 101 (91%) were caries-free and 10 (9%) had caries. In the resin-based sealant, 105 (94.60%) had sound teeth and 6 (5.4%) had dental caries (P = 0.34).
Conclusion: The glass ionomer sealant was less retentive when compared to resin sealants. The caries incidence between the glass ionomer and resin-based sealants was not statistically significant.
METHODS: 71 investigation sites of sound fissure and naturally occurring NCFC on human extracted premolars were identified and scanned with a swept-source OCT. The teeth were then sectioned bucco-lingually at the investigation sites and imaged using PLM. Two calibrated examiners trained on the B-scan NCFC visual interpretation criteria established for this study, assessed the investigation sites and results were validated against PLM.
RESULTS: Detection sensitivity of B-scan for NCFC when fissures were assessed in totality, or on the slopes or walls separately are 0.98, 0.95, 0.94 and specificity are 0.95, 0.90, and 0.95. One-way ANOVA showed that width measurements of wall loci done with OCT and PLM were not statistically different. However, OCT height measurements of slope loci were statistically bigger with a constant bias of 0.08 mm (of which is not clinically significant) and OCT height measurements of wall loci were statistically smaller (0.57 mm) and Bland-Altman plots indicated presence of proportionate bias.
CONCLUSION: Visual assessment of B-scans with the interpretation criteria resulted in both high specificity and sensitivity and were not affected by loci location. OCT width measurement of wall loci is in agreement with PLM.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Unanimous high sensitivity in this and previous studies indicate that visual assessment of B-scans reliably rule out NCFC. Detection accuracy was not affected by loci location. Width of wall loci and/or height of slope loci in OCT B-scan are to be used for monitoring NCFC but not height of wall loci.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 35 questions was distributed by mail or an online survey to 425 registered dentists selected according to place of work by stratified random sampling.
RESULTS: One hundred fifty-three dentists responded to the survey. A positive attitude towards FS and PRR was noted among most Malaysian dentists. About half of the respondents used FS/PRR occasionally (48.4%), while few (13.7%) applied them routinely. The majority of the dentists agreed that minimally invasive dentistry is important and FS are effective in caries prevention, using them on high caries-risk individuals. Most of the dentists used pumice or paste to clean teeth before placing FS/PRR. A significant number of dentists used a bonding agent prior to placing FS. Although only 57.5% dentists were aware of guidelines for FS use, most dentists agreed that guidelines are important.
CONCLUSION: Although there was a positive attitude towards FS/PRR, few dentists applied them routinely. Some of the steps undertaken for placement of FS and PRR were outdated. Updating local guidelines for dentists to ensure uniform practice of FS and PRR is justified.