Full text loading...
n Journal of Minimum Intervention in Dentistry - Retention of conventional GIC versus RM-GIC restorations - a brief quantitative systematic overview
Objective to appraise and present detailed quantitative evidence in answer to the review question; whether restorations placed with either conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) or resin-modified GIC (RM-GIC) have the same retention.
Search strategy The trials were identified from a search of the PubMed database on 15 December 2008 using the terms: "Glass Ionomer Cements"[Mesh] AND resin modified AND ("Dental Restoration, Permanent"[Mesh] OR "Dental Restoration, Temporary"[Mesh]) AND material retention". References of accepted articles were checked for additional studies suitable for inclusion.
Inclusion criteria Relevant to review question; Published in English; In-vivo or In-situ study design; Study on human subjects and human tissues; Randomised and quasi-randomised control trials; Contain computable (dichotomous) data for both, test- and control group.
Data collection and analysis The systematic literature search found 1 trial in line with the inclusion criteria. Of these, 4 individual datasets were extracted and analysed.
Main results and conclusions The result of all datasets showed no difference between low viscosity GIC and RMGIC. More clinical trials are needed.
Article metrics loading...