Statement of the Problem: Currently, the demand for tooth-colored restorations in children and young adults is increasing. Stainless steel crown (SSC) is the most common restoration for decayed primary molars. Given the dark metallic color of SSC, the esthetic appearance of this restoration is poor and subsequently their acceptance is still a matter of debate.
Purpose: This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of restoration’s color on children’s daily living conditions and compare the clinical and radiographic success rates of composite resins with SSC in primary molars.
Materials and Method: This clinical trial study was performed on 70 primary molars in 44 healthy 4- to 7-year-old children. The children were randomly divided into two groups: restored with SSC and restored with composite resin. Two researcher-made questionnaires were used to assess the children’s satisfaction concerning the appearance and color of restoration. The data were analyzed with SPSS 20 using chi-squared, Fisher’s, and Mann-Whitney U tests. The significance level was set at p< 0.05.
Results: Children’s satisfaction with restoration color in the treatment session was 75% in the SSC group and 85% in the composite resin group. However, the difference was not statistically significant (p= 0.246). After one year of follow-up, the satisfaction rate decreased to 69% in the SSC group and increased to 90.6% in the composite resin group, with a significant difference (p< 0.001). Moreover, the frequency of clinical success was 95% in the SSC group and 96.7% in the composite resin group, with no statistically significant difference (p= 0.749). The frequency of radiographic success was 87.5% in the SSC group and 100% in the composite resin group; this difference was not significant (p= 0.061).
Conclusion: The results verified that restoration color was not important for cooperative children in the treatment session. However, after one year, children who received composite resin restorations were pointedly more satisfied than those who were treated with SSC restorations. |
- Mathew R. Esthetics in primary teeth. Int Res J Pharm. 2013; 4: 80-82.
- Pani SC, Saffan AA, AlHobail S, Bin Salem F, AlFuraih A, AlTamimi M. Esthetic concerns and acceptability of treatment modalities in primary teeth: a comparison between children and their parents. Int J Dent. 2016; 2016: 3163904.
- Fishman R, Guelmann M, Bimstein E. Children’s selection of posterior restorative materials. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2006; 31: 1-4.
- Elkhodary HM, Alaki SM, Bagher S. Preferences of anterior and posterior dental restorative materials among children and parents. Dent J. 2015; 61: 3042-3054.
- Glauser R, Sailer I, Wohlwend A, Studer S, Schibli M, Schärer P. Experimental zirconia abutments for implant-supported single-tooth restorations in esthetically demanding regions: 4-year results of a prospective clinical study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004; 17: 285-290.
- Woo D, Sheller B, Williams B, Mancl L, Grembowski D. Dentists’ and parents’ perceptions of health, esthetics, and treatment of maxillary primary incisors. Pediatr Dent. 2005; 27: 19-23.
- Usha M, Deepak V, Venkat S, Gargi M. Treatment of severely mutilated incisors: a challenge to the pedodontist. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2007; 25 Suppl: S34-S36.
- Bryan RA, Welbury RR. Treatment of aesthetic problems in paediatric dentistry. Dent Update. 2003; 30: 307-313.
- Mouradian WE. Making decisions for children. Angle Orthod. 1999; 69: 300-305.
- Memarpour M, Derafshi R, Razavi M. Comparison of microleakage from stainless steel crowns margins used with different restorative materials: an in vitro Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2016; 13: 7-12.
- Chisini LA, Collares K, Cademartori MG, de Oliveira LJC, Conde MCM, Demarco FF, et al. Restorations in primary teeth: a systematic review on survival and reasons for failures. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2018; 28: 123-139.
- Gupta SK, Saxena P, Pant VA, Pant AB. Release and toxicity of dental resin composite. Toxicol Int. 2012; 19: 225.
- Aiem E, Smaïl-Faugeron V, Muller-Bolla M. Aesthetic preformed paediatric crowns: systematic review. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2017; 27: 273-282.
- Akhlaghi N, Hajiahmadi M, Golbidi M. Attitudes of parents and children toward primary molars restoration with stainless steel crown. Contemp Clin Dent. 2017; 8: 421-426.
- Venete A, Trillo-Lumbreras E, Prado-Gascó VJ, Bellot-Arcís C, Almerich-Silla JM, Montiel-Company JM. Relationship between the psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics and perfectionism and self-esteem. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017; 9: e1453-e1458.
- Mathew MG, Roopa KB, Soni AJ, Khan MM, Kauser A. Evaluation of clinical success, parental and child satisf-action of stainless steel crowns and zirconia Crowns in Primary Molars. J Family Med Prim Care. 2020; 9: 1418-1423.
- Utami S, Dwi H, Lisfriza H. The attitudes of parents and children towards restoration of deciduous molar teeth with stainless steel crown (SSC) in the Dental Hospital University of Baiturrahmah. J Dentomaxillofac Sci. 2020; 5: 52-55.
- Zimmerman JA, Feigal RJ, Till MJ, Hodges JS. Parental attitudes on restorative materials as factors influencing current use in pediatric dentistry. Pediatr Dent. 2009; 31: 63-70.
- White R. Innovative orthodontic band matrices in pediatric dentistry for Class II restorations. Pediatr Dent.
1999; 21: 373-374.
- Alyahya A, Khanum A, Qudeimat M. Clinical assessme-nt of class II resin-based composites versus preformed metal crowns performed on primary molars in patients at high risk of caries. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2018; 19: 39-45.
- Zahdan BA, Szabo A, Gonzalez CD, Okunseri EM, Okunseri CE. Survival rates of stainless steel crowns and multi-surface composite restorations placed by dental students in a pediatric clinic. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2018; 42: 167-172.
- Chen K, Lei Q, Xiong H, Chen Y, Luo W, Liang Y. A 2-year clinical evaluation of stainless steel crowns and composite resin restorations in primary molars under general anaesthesia in China’s Guangdong province. Br Dent J. 2018; 225: 49-52.
- Haugen HJ, Marovic D, Par M, Thieu MKL, Reseland J E, Johnsen GF. Bulk Fill composites have similar performance to conventional dental composites. Int J Mol Sci. 2020; 21: 5136.
- Oter B, Deniz K, Cehreli S. Preliminary data on clinical performance of bulk-fill restorations in primary molars. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018; 21: 1484-1491.
- Majety KK, Pujar M. In vitro evaluation of microleakage of class II packable composite resin restorations using flowable composite and resin modified glass ionomers as intermediate layers. J Conserv Dent. 2011; 14: 414-417.
- Baroudi K, Rodrigues JC. Flowable resin composites: a systematic review and clinical considerations. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015; 9: ZE18-ZE24.
|
