Evaluation and Treatment of Crown Fractures Using the Modified Baysal Dental Trauma Index

The sample size was determined based on a statistical power analysis. This analysis was conducted with an effect size of w = 0.5, an alpha error probability of α = 0.05, and a power of 1 - β = 0.8. Calculations performed for two degrees of freedom (df = 2) yielded a total required sample size of 39 participants.

Inclusion criteria

Age between 6 and 14 years Presence of a traumatic dental injury in a permanent tooth Type of TDI classified as either complicated or uncomplicated crown fracture Consent to participate provided by the patient's legal guardian

Exclusion criteria

Patients outside the 6-14 age range or presenting for other reasons Patients with traumatic dental injuries other than crown fractures

Types of Treatments Applied for Crown Fractures:

Restoration with composite resin Vital pulp therapies Regeneration Root canal treatment

Clinical Evaluation Criteria of Our Study:

Presence of pain and percussion sensitivity was considered a failure. Presence of abscess and fistula was considered a failure. Repair of the restoration was not considered a failure. Teeth showing loss of vitality and gray discoloration due to necrosis were considered a failure. The treatment success was evaluated using the Periapical Index (PAI) on periapical radiographs obtained from patients included in the study during follow-up visits. Internal and external root resorption were considered failures.

If the radiolucent area observed at the apex had developed or increased after treatment, it was considered a failure.

Reduction of initial radiolucencies observed in baseline radiographs of patients at the start of treatment or in those presenting late was considered a success.

Evaluation was performed according to the Periapical Index (PAI) described by Ørstavik et al. in 1986.

Disruption in the continuity of the lamina dura was considered a failure, whereas formation and continued development of the lamina dura were considered a success.

An increase in root length was considered a success. Calcification observed within the root canals was considered a failure. For immature traumatic teeth with an open apex at the start of treatment, continued and completed root maturation was considered a success.

Inclusion criteria

• Age between 6 and 14 years
• Presence of traumatic dental injury involving a permanent tooth
• Type of injury classified as a complicated or uncomplicated crown fracture
• Informed consent obtained from the patient's parent or legal guardian

Exclusion criteria

• Patients younger than 6 or older than 14 years, or those presenting for non-trauma-related dental issues
• Patients with traumatic dental injuries other than crown fractures (e.g., luxation, avulsion)