Clinical assessment of some physical and mechanical properties of different restorative materials in primary molars
A, F., YS, E., I F, B. (2018). Clinical assessment of some physical and mechanical properties of different restorative materials in primary molars. EKB Journal Management System, 21(5), 459-463. doi: 10.21608/ajdsm.2018.71685
Farghly A; El Bayoumy YS; Barakat I F. "Clinical assessment of some physical and mechanical properties of different restorative materials in primary molars". EKB Journal Management System, 21, 5, 2018, 459-463. doi: 10.21608/ajdsm.2018.71685
A, F., YS, E., I F, B. (2018). 'Clinical assessment of some physical and mechanical properties of different restorative materials in primary molars', EKB Journal Management System, 21(5), pp. 459-463. doi: 10.21608/ajdsm.2018.71685
A, F., YS, E., I F, B. Clinical assessment of some physical and mechanical properties of different restorative materials in primary molars. EKB Journal Management System, 2018; 21(5): 459-463. doi: 10.21608/ajdsm.2018.71685

Clinical assessment of some physical and mechanical properties of different restorative materials in primary molars

Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science
Article 7, Volume 21, Issue 5, December 2018, Page 459-463  XML PDF (391.13 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/ajdsm.2018.71685
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Farghly A* 1; El Bayoumy YS* 2; Barakat I F3
1B.D.S 2009, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University (Assuit Branch) Dentist at Students’ Hospital Assiut University
2Professor and Head, Department of Pedodontics and Dental Public Health Faculty of Dental Medicine, Boys,Cairo Al-Azhar University
3Ibrahim Farouk Barakat Professor assistant Pedodontics and Oral Health Departement Faculty of Dental Medi-cine, Boys, Cairo, Al-Azhar University
Abstract
Purpose the present study directed to clinically assessment of bulk Fill composite, multicolored compomer and bioactive restorative Materia in primary molars. Methods: The study sample was divided equally into three groups group I comprises 20 primary molars received multicolored compomer, group II comprises 20 primary molars received bulk fill composite ,group III comprises 20 primary molars received bioactive materials . The clinical evaluation of all restorations was carried out at baseline before preparation and directly after restoration, after 3 and 6 months. Results: comparing three groups there were About surface glass, Surface &Marginal Staining there were significance difference between groups at 6 mons. (P<0.05). Also, about Color match stability & translucency there were highly significance difference between groups (P<0.000). As regard there were non-significance difference between different groups at periods (P>0.05) in previous item of aesthetic properties. There was significance difference between groups in Postoperative sensitivity & tooth vitality (P<0.05) at baseline. As regard there were significance in periods in group3 about Tooth cracks &fractures between different groups at 6mns. Conclusions: Better surface gloss, color match and stability better for bulk fill and multicolored compomer. Major drawbacks of gingival margin of posterior class II multicolored compomer is recurrence of caries than bulk fill and bioactive material. The advent of bulk fill composites, would seem to be a significant turning point in posterior direct restorative dentistry.
Statistics
Article View: 178
PDF Download: 279