Comparison of Proximal Contact Tightness of Zirconia Reinforced Glass Ionomer Versus Conventional Nanohybrid Resin Composite: a Randomized Clinical Trial
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Active, not recruiting
- Sponsor
- Cairo University
- Enrollment
- 52
- Locations
- 2
- Primary Endpoint
- Contact Tightness
Study Overview
Brief Summary
To achieve an optimal contact area is essential to avoid tooth migration, food impaction, and the occurrence of secondary caries. However, proximal restorations constitute challenge for the professional and tight contact points are difficult to obtain depending not only on tools used, but also on type of restorative material. Current tooth-colored restorative materials are not condensable and there is shrinkage with setting. The aim of this study is to compare the proximal contact tightness of zirconia reinforced glass ionomer versus conventional nanohybrid resin composite when used in class II cavities.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 19 Years to 35 Years (Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Inclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Contact Tightness
Time Frame: baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months and 1 year
Measuring the adequacy of proximal contact restoration using intervention \' zirconomer\" versus control which is Nanohybrid resin composite. Heaviness of this contact using Modified USPHS criteria. USPHS criteria are standardized in which a dental floss is used. Contact tightness can have one of three scores: Alpha Bravo Charlie
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported
Investigators
Alaa Fathi Abdelsalam
Principal in investigator
Cairo University