Comparison to check the long term use of three different filling material in cavities.
Not Applicable
- Conditions
- Health Condition 1: 4- Measurement and MonitoringHealth Condition 2: null- suffering from dental caries and seaking treatment
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2018/10/015880
- Lead Sponsor
- Dr Riddhi Hirani
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- ot Yet Recruiting
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 0
Inclusion Criteria
Age 16-50.
Class I Cavities.
Willing to Participate in the Study.
Exclusion Criteria
Pathologic pulpal diagnosis with pain(non-vital).
Defective restoration adjacent to or opposing the tooth.
Rampant caries.
Poor oral hygiene.
Severe or chronic periodontitis.
Heavy bruxism.
Allergy to materials used in this trial
With previous restorations, tooth surface loss (attrition, erosion, abrasion or abfraction).
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method SPHS - United states public health servicesTimepoint: 1 month <br/ ><br>3 month <br/ ><br>6 month
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method VAS -visual analogue ScaleTimepoint: 24 hrs,1 week ,1 months
Related Research Topics
Explore scientific publications, clinical data analysis, treatment approaches, and expert-compiled information related to the mechanisms and outcomes of this trial. Click any topic for comprehensive research insights.
How do bonding agents in Cention N, Equia Forte, and Activa Bulk Fill influence dentin adhesion in posterior restorations?
What is the long-term durability of Cention N versus resin-modified glass ionomer cements in Class I restorations?
Which biomarkers predict success of bulk-fill composites in preventing secondary caries?
What adverse events are common with Activa Bulk Fill in posterior restorations and how are they managed?
How does Cention N's composition compare to other calcium hydroxide-based restorative materials in caries management?