Modified composite or conventional glass ionomer for band cementation? A comparative clinical trial

T. J. Gillgrass, P. C.M. Benington, D. T. Millett, J. Newell, W. H. Gilmour

Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer)Articlepeer-review

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The time to first failure, the position of band failure at deband, and the change in enamel white spot lesions of teeth bonded with a modified composite or a conventional glass ionomer were compared in a randomized half-mouth trial over the full course of orthodontic treatment. One hundred forty band pairs were cemented in 98 subjects. Overall band failure rates of 5% and 2.8% were recorded for the modified composite and the conventional glass ionomer, respectively, with no significant difference found between their times to first band failure. At the end-of-treatment deband, the position of band failure was predominantly at the enamel-cement interface for the modified composite and at the band-cement interface for the conventional glass ionomer (P < .001). A comparison of changes in mean enamel white spot lesion scores during treatment did not reveal significant differences between the cement groups (P = .16).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)49-53
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume120
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Modified composite or conventional glass ionomer for band cementation? A comparative clinical trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this