Abstract
Restoration of primary teeth continues to be an important facet of restorative dentistry. In comparison to restorations in permanent dentition, the longevity of those in primary teeth is significantly different for all materials. This makes the assessment of these fillings as a separate group meaningful. As there is lack of supporting clinical data with regard to the restoration of primary incisors, it would be judicious to consider why this is so and determine if studies can be designed to gain new information. The purpose of this study was therefore to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of composite resins and resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations of primary incisors, over a period of one year. METHODS: The study group consisted of 40 patients (3½- 5 ½ years of age) with at least one pair of similar sized lesions in the middle1/3 of the same proximal surface of contralateral primary maxillary incisors. Composite resin and resinmodified glass ionomer cement restorations were placed in primary maxillary incisors using split-mouth design. The restorations were evaluated at different intervals of 3,6,9, months and 1 year using Ryge's criteria. Data obtained was analyzed using Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: The results revealed no statistical significance in the difference of clinical characteristics between the two restorative materials. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION: (1) Resin-modified glass ionomer cement and composite resin restorative materials showed acceptable clinical performance after 1 year in primary teeth. (2) Resin-modified glass ionomer cement and composite resin restorative materials functioned well as class III restorative materials in primary teeth.