Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05749991

Efficacy and Retention of Sealants Placement Using Two Isolation Systems

The trial aimed to evaluate the sealant retention, patient's preference and chair time needed during pit and fissure sealant placement under two isolation techniques [Dryshield system (DS) and cotton roll isolation (CRI)] in a university setting.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

6 year–12 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Kuwait University Faculty of Dentistry Dental Clinics

Kuwait City, Kuwait

About this study

In children, 80-90% of dental caries is found in the pits and fissures of the posterior permanent teeth. Pit and fissure sealants (PFS) can be used effectively to prevent dental caries. When applied correctly, dental PFS accomplish three main objectives: preventing dental caries development, hindering dental caries development in its initial phases, and inhibiting the spread of bacteria that cause dental caries. To be effective, PFS need to be applied under sufficient moisture control around the specific teeth undergoing treatment. Therefore, proper isolation of the teeth is one of the most important steps when placing sealants to ensure their retention.

Cotton roll isolation (CRI) has been widely used for sealant placement, and is the most common method among pediatric dentists. However, the placement of cotton rolls on the lateral part of the tongue or inadequate isolation during CRI has both been reported to produce gagging, tasting the contents and requiring frequent replacement of the wet cotton rolls.

A previous study demonstrated that new moisture control systems such as Isolite, produce sealant retention rates comparable to cotton roll isolation, while decreasing procedure time. DryShield (DS) has recently been introduced as an all-in-one isolation system. It is similar to the Isolite as it combines the tasks of fluid evacuation, tongue and cheek retraction, and serves as a bite block, but differs in that it is autoclavable and does not provide illumination. Its design allows it to suction and isolate half the oral cavity at a time. Therefore, it should presumably facilitate sealants placement under a more controlled environment, while reducing chair time for the dentist.

Few trials have compared the PFS chair time and patient acceptance of DS to the CRI. The goals of this study were to evaluate patients' preferences, time efficiency, and retention of PFS using DS compared to CRI in a single randomized clinical study.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Healthy patients with no compromising medical or physical condition
  • age ranging from six to 12 years old;
  • patients with at least one caries-free permanent molar in any quadrant, with normal anatomy, who qualified for pit and fissure sealant application with an International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) score of 0-2.
  • no prior sealants or restorations on the teeth under study;
  • no cavitated carious lesions;
  • cooperative patients (classified as 3 or 4 according to the Frankl Behavioral Rating Scale)
  • legal guardian consents and approved assents to the child's participation in the study.

Exclusion criteria

  • a history of chronic disease (e.g., epilepsy, ectodermal dysplasia, cardiac anomalies);
  • inability to return for follow-ups.
  • patients with molars that have partially erupted
  • a permanent molar with enamel flaws or abnormal anatomy
  • children who are uncooperative, with a Frankl Behaviour Rating Scale of 1 or 2;
  • children who have a severe gagging reflex;
  • special needs children.
  • Those who do not provide appropriate assents or consents

Treatment and study plan

DryShield

Device

DryShield combines the tasks of high-suction evacuator, saliva ejector, bite block, tongue shield, and oral pathway protector in one easy-to-use device.

The DryShield solution® is a patented autoclavable isolation system (MA, USA)

Cotton roll isolation

Device

Cotton Roll Isolation requires placing cotton rolls along the buccal mucosa, especially over the parotid glands ducts for maxillary teeth. For the mandibular teeth, the cotton rolls are placed in the buccal vestibule and the floor of the mouth (between the lower buccal mucosa and underneath and/or between the tongue). With this technique, a high-speed evacuation of saliva and water is used.

Other names: Cotton roll

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Fissure Sealant Retention at 6 months

    Time frame: Change in sealant retention at 6 months

    Patients were clinically evaluated by a study supervisor as a blinded outcome assessor after 6 months of sealant placement. The evaluation was according to Simonsen's criteria: Completely retained, Partially retained, or Missing.

  2. Change in Fissure Sealant Retention at 12 months

    Time frame: Change in sealant retention at 12 months

    Patients were clinically evaluated by a study supervisor as a blinded outcome assessor after 12 months of sealant placement. The evaluation was according to Simonsen's criteria: Completely retained, Partially retained, or Missing.

  3. Change in Fissure Sealant Retention at 18 months

    Time frame: Change in sealant retention at 18 months

    assessor after 18 months of sealant placement. The evaluation was according to Simonsen's criteria: Completely retained, Partially retained, or Missing.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Placement time of sealants using Dryshield vs Cotton roll isolation

    Time frame: 0 Day (After the completion of initial sealant placement and removal of the isolation device)

    The placement time for sealant application was recorded with a stopwatch by the dental assistant as follows for the two techniques: the insertion of the isolation aids (DS or CRI) in the oral cavity constituted the start time, and the end time was when the isolation system was completely removed from the participant's mouth after the sealants application.

  2. Patient preference for Dryshield or Cotton roll isolation

    Time frame: 0 Day (After the completion of initial sealant placement and removal of the isolation device)

    A six-item interview-based questionnaire was administered to assess participants' acceptance of the isolation technique used.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Kuwait University

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Fissure Sealant Retention Rate, Chair Time, and Patients' Preference Using Dryshield and Cotton Roll Isolation

Important dates

Study start
2018
Primary completion
2020
Study completion
2020
First posted
Mar 1, 2023
Registry last updated
Mar 1, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.