Muhanad S Alhareky1, Danya Mermelstein2, Matthew Finkelman3, Jehan Alhumaid4, Cheen Loo2. 1. Department of Dental Public Health, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA. Mhareky@gmail.com. 2. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, at Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA. 3. Department of Public Health and Community Service, at Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA. 4. Department of Preventive Dental Science, School of Dentistry, University of Dammam, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the chair time and degree of patient satisfaction after use of the Isolite system (IS) versus rubber dam (RD) during the application of pit and fissure sealants. METHODS: The patients included in this study ranged from seven to 16 years old. In each subject, pit and fissure sealants were applied to one permanent molar in each quadrant. IS dental isolation was used on one side; RD isolation was used on the other side. Chair time was assessed using a stopwatch, and patient acceptance was evaluated using a questionnaire. RESULTS:Forty-two subjects (23 females and 19 males) were enrolled in the study. The average chair time was 19.36 minutes for the application of pit and fissure sealants on the RD side; average chair time was 10 minutes for the IS side (P<.001). Sixty-nine percent of the subjects were more comfortable using IS, while 31 percent found RD to be more comfortable (P=.02). CONCLUSION: Isolite is a viable alternative to the conventional rubber dam. The use of Isolite is associated with reduced chair time and greater patient satisfaction.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the chair time and degree of patient satisfaction after use of the Isolite system (IS) versus rubber dam (RD) during the application of pit and fissure sealants. METHODS: The patients included in this study ranged from seven to 16 years old. In each subject, pit and fissure sealants were applied to one permanent molar in each quadrant. IS dental isolation was used on one side; RD isolation was used on the other side. Chair time was assessed using a stopwatch, and patient acceptance was evaluated using a questionnaire. RESULTS: Forty-two subjects (23 females and 19 males) were enrolled in the study. The average chair time was 19.36 minutes for the application of pit and fissure sealants on the RD side; average chair time was 10 minutes for the IS side (P<.001). Sixty-nine percent of the subjects were more comfortable using IS, while 31 percent found RD to be more comfortable (P=.02). CONCLUSION: Isolite is a viable alternative to the conventional rubber dam. The use of Isolite is associated with reduced chair time and greater patient satisfaction.
Authors: Fang Jingxian; Liu Yang; Liu Qiong; Qian Hong; Liu Hedi; Zhang Jinglan; Liu Fang; Yang Jing; Wu Xiaoming; Song Yingying Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 3.411