Content area
Abstract
Objectives To undertake a clinical trial comparing the efficiency of a compomer restoration with a glass ionomer restoration in the management of caries in primary molar teeth. Design Subjects were admitted to the trial if they required at least one pair of restorations in primary molar teeth. Setting Department of Child Dental Health, Newcastle Dental Hospital and School. Subject Twenty nine children, aged 4-9 years, had 56 pairs of restorations placed between January 1995 and November 1997. Method The durability of the restorations was assessed during a 42-month follow-up period using modified United States Public Health Service criteria. Survival analysis and the McNemar paired test were used to compare the performance of the two restorative materials. Results The compomer restorations had a higher mean survival time (42 months, SE 1.40) compared with 37 months (SE 1.90) for the glass ionomer restorations and this was significant at the 5% level. The compomer also performed significantly better in terms of anatomical form, marginal integrity, cavo surface discoloration and maintenance of interproximal contact. Conclusions The present trial demonstrated that Dyract compomer performed significantly better than Chemfil Superior a glass ionomer cement for all modified United States Public Health Service criteria over a period of 42 months.