User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
 Views 8
One Year Clinical Evaluation of a Low Shrinkage Composite Compared with a Packable Composite Resin: A Randomized Clinical Trial
2017
Journal:  
Frontiers in Dentistry
Author:  
Abstract:

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a packable and a low shrinkage methacrylate-based composite after one year. Materials and Methods:In this clinical trial, 50 class I or II restorations were placed in 25 patients. Each patient received two restorations. The tested materials were: (I) Filtek P60 + Single Bond 2 and (II) Kalore GC + Single Bond 2. The restorations were evaluated by two independent examiners after one week (baseline), six months and one year according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. The evaluated parameters included color match, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, retention, surface texture, postoperative sensitivity, marginal staining and secondary caries. Data were then analyzed using Friedman and conditional (matched) logistic regression tests at P<0.05 level of significance. Results: P60 and Kalore performed similarly at six months and one year (P>0.05). When each composite resin was evaluated independently at baseline and after one year, no statistically significant differences were found except for marginal adaptation (P60) where four restorations were rated Bravo (clinically acceptable). In 8% of restorations, patients expressed postoperative sensitivity. Conclusions: Kalore GC and Filtek P60 showed acceptance clinical performance after one year of service.  

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Information: There is no ciation to this publication.
Similar Articles












Frontiers in Dentistry

Field :   Sağlık Bilimleri

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 854
Cite : 372
Frontiers in Dentistry