الفهرس 
Clinical evaluation of bioactive restorative material versus resin modified glass ionmer in cervical restorations
Abstract EnglishOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 158 |  |  |
| | | from | 158 | | |
Abstract
Aim: This current study aimed to compare Bioactive resin-based composite (ACTIVA) to Resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI) in cervical restorations. Materials and methods: In a parallel mouth design, Fuji II LC® capsules (Resin modified glass ionomer), or ACTIVA{u2122} BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE{u2122} (enhanced resin-modified glass-ionomer) with using Etch-Rite{u2122} and Prime&Bond universal (universal adhesive system) were applied randomly in thirty anterior teeth and six premolars with class V cavities; all materials were applied according to manufacturers{u2019}instructions. Restorations were evaluated at baseline (one week), after six months, and after12 months by two blinded assessors using modified USPHS criteria measuring (marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, surface roughness, color match, surface luster, retention analysis, and recurrent caries). Results: The results in this study were ordinal data, so Mann-Whitney test was used to compare between tested materials. Freidman test was used to test the effect of time within tested materials.Kruskal Wallis test used to compare the interaction between variables for all tested parameters. The results were statistically significant when p{u2264}0.05. There was no significant difference between interaction of both restorations and time in marginal discoloration (p=0.051), recurrent caries (p=1.00) and retention analysis (p=1.00), but there was a significant change in marginal adaptation (p=0.001), surface roughness (p=0.017), color change (p= 0.004) and surface luster (p=0.017) with 100 % survival rate in this study