Abstract:

Objective: This study aimed to compare the 12-month clinical performance of a glass carbomer cement (GCP glass fill), a glass hybrid cement (Equia Forte) and a compomer material (Dyract XP) in primary molar class II restorations. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out on 105 primary molars with class II lesion in 35 children aged 6-9 years. Three different restorative materials were placed in each child. Restorations were evaluated according to the modified United States Public Health Service criteria after the first week and at sixth and 12th months. Data obtained were evaluated statistically. Results: After 12 months, 32 children were available and 96 restorations were evaluated. The clinical success of the compomer material, glass carbomer cement, and glass hybrid cement were 96.9%, 15.6%, and 9.4%, respectively. Conclusion: After the 12-month treatment period, the clinical success of the compomer material was significantly higher than those of the glass carbomer cement and glass hybrid cement groups.

Keywords: