الفهرس 
Title : Clinical performance of bioactive restorative material versus glass hybrid restorative in posterior restorations of high caries risk patients : Randomized clinical trial
AbstractOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 179 |  |  |
| | | from | 179 | | |
Abstract
Aim: This randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the Clinical Performance of Bioactive Restorative Material versus Glass Hybrid Restorative in Posterior Restorations of High Caries Risk Patients. Methods: High caries risk patients with multiple posterior cavitated carious lesions were enrolled in this trial, Utilizing split mouth design (n = 25), 50 teeth were randomly received either Resin-modified glass ionomer: bioactive ionic resin-based composite (ACTIVA{u2122} BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE{u2122}, Pulpdent, USA) or Bulk-fill glass hybrid restorative (EQUIA Forte, GC, Japan). Materials were applied according to the manufacturer instructions. Two well-trained experienced blinded assessors evaluated the restorations at baseline, 6 months and 12 months using FDI criteria for direct and indirect restorations. Data represented as Frequency (n) and percentage (%). Chi-square test used to compare between tested groups for each parameter evaluated. Kaplan Meier survival analysis was performed to evaluate the survival of restoration after 6- and 12-months follow-up points (Ü=0.05). Statistical Analysis was performed using IBM SPSS (version 26, Armonk, USA).Results: The survival percentage for the intervention and comparator groups was 98% (86-100 95%CI) after 6 and 12 months. Regarding the primary outcome (the biological properties) no statistically significant difference was observed between both tested groups at different follow-up periods. While for the secondary outcome, At baseline, no difference between the tested groups was observed for all esthetic parameters (p>0.05) except in color match parameter; which showed a significant better score for Activa compared to Equia group which showed a (100% clinically sufficient score)