The success rates of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant placed by fifth-year undergraduate dental students

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate retention and caries prevention of a glass-ionomer cement (GIC) and a resin-based fissure sealant placed by fifth-year undergraduate dental students. METHODS: The study was conducted according to a split-mouth, randomised clinical trial. Children with at least one pair of caries-free permanent first molars with deep pits and fissures were included in the study. The children were selected from a population that had a high risk for dental caries. Sealant materials were applied by fifth-year undergraduate dental students on 346 fissures of the first permanent molars in 173 children. The ages of the children ranged from 7–15 years (mean 9.4). Two researchers at the clinics supervised all of the procedures. Intra-examiner reproducibility and inter-examiner reproducibility were 0.90 and 0.86, respectively, for the clinical assessment of sealant retention and caries evaluation. RESULTS: GIC sealants were completely lost in 31.9% and resin-based sealants in 16.6% (p<0.05). The total retention rates of GIC sealants and resin-based sealants were 13.8% and 20.8%, respectively. After 24 months, the caries increment was 3.4% for GIC sealants and 4.8% for resin-based sealants (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The retention of GIC sealants was markedly inferior to the retention of resin-based sealants; however, GIC when used as a pit and fissure sealant was slightly more effective in preventing occlusal caries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Arrow P, Riordan PJ. Retention and caries preventive effects of a GIC and a resin-based fissure sealant. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1995; 23:282–285.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Barja-Fidalgo F, Maroun S, de Oliveira BH. Effectiveness of a GIC used as a pit and fissure sealant in recently erupted permanent first molars. J Dent Child (Chic) 2009; 76:34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beiruti N, Frencken JE, van’t Hof MA, Taifour D, van Palenstein Helderman WH. Caries-preventive effect of a one-time application of composite resin and glass ionomer sealants after 5 years. Caries Res 2006; 40:52–59.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bishara SE, Oonsombat C, Ajlouni R, Denehy G. The effect of saliva contamination on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets when using a self-etch primer. Angle Orthod 2002; 72:554–557.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brown LJ, Selwitz RH. The impact of recent changes in the epidemiology of dental caries on guidelines for the use of dental sealants. J Public Health Dent 1995; 55:274–291.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brown LJ, Wall TP, Lazar V. Trends in untreated caries in permanent teeth of children 6 to 18 years old. J Am Dent Assoc 1999; 130:1637–1644 contd.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Carvalho JC, Ekstrand KR, Thylstrup A. Dental plaque and caries on occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars in relation to stage of eruption. J Dent Res 1989; 68:773–779.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Forss H, Halme E. Retention of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant and effect on carious outcome after 7 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1998; 26:21–25.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Forss H, Saarni UM, Seppa L. Comparison of glass-ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants: a 2-year clinical trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1994; 22:21–24.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD. ART restorations and glass ionomer sealants in Zimbabwe: survival after 3 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1998; 26:372–381.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Holmgren CJ, Lo EC, Hu D, Wan H. ART restorations and sealants placed in Chinese school children-results after three years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2000; 28:314–320.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaste LM, Selwitz RH, Oldakowski RJ, Brunelle JA, Winn DM, Brown LJ. Coronal caries in the primary and permanent dentition of children and adolescents 1–17 years of age: United States, 1988–1991. J Dent Res 1996; 75 Spec No: 631–641.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ketley CE, Holt RD. Visual and radiographic diagnosis of occlusal caries in first permanent molars and in second primary molars. Br Dent J 1993; 174:364–370.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Locker D, Jokovic A, Kay EJ. Prevention. Part 8: The use of pit and fissure sealants in preventing caries in the permanent dentition of children. Br Dent J 2003; 195:375–378.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McLean JW, Wilson AD. Fissure sealing and filling with an adhesive glass-ionomer cement. Br Dent J 1974; 136:269–276.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mejare I, Mjor IA. Glass ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants: a clinical study. Scand J Dent Res 1990; 98:345–350.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Muller-Bolla M, Lupi-Pegurier L, Tardieu C, Velly AM, Antomarchi C. Retention of resin-based pit and fissure sealants: A systematic review. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2006; 34:321–336.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. NCHS. National Center for Health Statistics. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: www.cdc/nchs/nhanes.htm. Accessed October 2. 2007.

  19. Pardi V, Pereira AC, Mialhe FL, Meneghim Mde C, Ambrosano GM. A 5-year evaluation of two glass-ionomer cements used as fissure sealants. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2003; 31:386–391.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Poulsen S, Beiruti N, Sadat N. A comparison of retention and the effect on caries of fissure sealing with a glass-ionomer and a resin-based sealant. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2001; 29:298–301.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Poulsen S, Laurberg L, Vaeth M, Jensen U, Haubek D. A field trial of resin-based and glass-ionomer fissure sealants: clinical and radiographic assessment of caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2006; 34:36–40.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ripa LW. Sealants revisted: an update of the effectiveness of pit-and-fissure sealants. Caries Res 1993; 27 Suppl 1:77–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Simonsen RJ. Retention and effectiveness of dental sealant after 15 years. J Am Dent Assoc 1991; 122:34–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Simonsen RJ. Pit and fissure sealant: review of the literature. Pediatr Dent 2002; 24:393–414.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Skrinjaric K, Vranic DN, Glavina D, Skrinjaric I. Heat-treated glass ionomer cement fissure sealants: retention after 1 year follow-up. Int J Paediatr Dent 2008; 18:368–373.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Smales RJ, Wong KC. 2-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer sealant. Am J Dent 1999; 12:59–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Smith DC. Development of glass-ionomer cement systems. Biomaterials 1998; 19:467–478.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Songpaisan Y, Bratthall D, Phantumvanit P, Somridhivej Y. Effects of glass ionomer cement, resin-based pit and fissure sealant and HF applications on occlusal caries in a developing country field trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1995; 23:25–29.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Splieth CH, Ekstrand KR, Alkilzy M. et al. Sealants in dentistry: outcomes of the ORCA Saturday Afternoon Symposium 2007. Caries Res 2010; 44:3–13.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Straffon LH, Dennison JB, More FG. Three-year evaluation of sealant: effect of isolation on efficacy. J Am Dent Assoc 1985; 110:714–717.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Taifour D, Frencken JE, van’t Hof MA, Beiruti N, Truin GJ. Effects of glass ionomer sealants in newly erupted first molars after 5 years: a pilot study. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2003; 31:314–319.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Torppa-Saarinen E, Seppa L. Short-term retention of glass-ionomer fissure sealants. Proc Finn Dent Soc 1990; 86:83–88.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Weerheijm KL, Kreulen CM, Gruythuysen RJ. Comparison of retentive qualities of two glass-ionomer cements used as fissure sealants. ASDC J Dent Child 1996; 63:265–267.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Williams B, Winter GB. Fissure sealants. Further results at 4 years. Br Dent J 1981; 150:183–187.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Williams B, Laxton L, Holt RD, Winter GB. Fissure sealants: a 4-year clinical trial comparing an experimental glass polyalkenoate cement with a bis glycidyl methacrylate resin used as fissure sealants. Br Dent J 1996; 180:104–108.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dr. M. E. Odabaş.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ulusu, T., Odabaş, M.E., Tüzüner, T. et al. The success rates of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant placed by fifth-year undergraduate dental students. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 13, 94–97 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03262852

Download citation

Key words

  • Glass ionomer sealants
  • resin-based sealants
  • retention
  • caries prevention
  • dental students