Filtek Silorane showed acceptable clinical performance after one year. However, the lowshrinkage resin combined with the self-etch adhesive did not provide any advantage over the methacrylate-based composite combined with the total-etch adhesive.
SUMMARYObjectives: The aim of this study was to compare the one-year clinical performance of three restorative systems, which included a novel low-shrinkage composite and two bonding strategies.Materials and Methods: Twenty-five patients received three Class I (occlusal) or Class II restorations performed with one of three restorative systems: Filtek Silorane Restorative System (FS); Adper Scotchbond 1 XT, a twostep etch-and-rinse adhesive, with Filtek Z250 (XT); and Adper Scotchbond SE, a two-step self-etch adhesive, with Filtek Z250 (SE). All materials were applied following the manufacturer's instructions. Two independent observers evaluated the restorations at baseline, after six months, and after one year, according to the United States Public Health System modified criteria. The Kruskal-Wallis test and the Mann-Whitney U-test were computed to compare the behavior of the restorative systems; Friedman and Wilcoxon tests were used to analyze the intrasystem data (a=0.05).Results: All restorations were evaluated at one year. FS and XT performed statistically similarly at one year, but marginal staining for SE was statistically worse. Intrasystem comparisons between baseline and one year also showed deterioration of marginal staining for SE, while a deterioration of the marginal adaptation was recorded for both SE and FS. XT was the only system for which there was no
Although the clinical performance of Filtek Silorane was considered acceptable after two years, no advantage of the silorane-based resin over the methacrylate-based composite was found. Teeth restored with Adper Scotchbond SE showed a tendency for marginal staining, which may compromise the final color of the restorations.
Background
This study aimed to assess the quality of the information about COVID-19 that Spanish dentists felt they were provided; their opinion about the actions by Health Institutions; their perception of the risk infection at work; and the security measures implemented to prevent contagion.
Material and Methods
A specific questionnaire was developed and made available online from March 18th to 20th 2020. Dentists working in Spain were invited to answer. Questions were divided in 4 sections: demographic data and professional activity; specific information on COVID-19 and opinion about the decisions taken by Dental Councils and Health Authorities; risk assessment for SARS-CoV-2 in dental practices; and implementation of new ways of working. Chi-square tests were computed (
p
<0.05). 873 dentists answered the survey.
Results
A majority of dentists considered that Health Authorities did not take right decisions during the outbreak (86.37%), and were concerned both about getting infected at work (83.16%) and being a potential carrier to their patients (72.97%). Due to COVID-19, 59.11% of the dentists incorporated new protective measures in the dental practice, 60.17% began dealing with emergencies only and 39.18% stopped working.
Conclusions
Most dentists were worried about infection in their workplaces, particularly women and dentists from the most affected regions by COVID-19. Almost 90% of the participants considered that this pandemic will change the way they provide dental care in the future.
Key words:
COVID-19, pandemic, disease transmission, dentists´ behavior, dental practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.