Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Choosing the Criteria for Clinical Evaluation of Composite Restorations: An Analysis of Impact on Reliabilty and Treatment Decision
Cavalheiro, Cleber Paradzinski; Souza, Pablo Soares de; Rocha, Rachel de Oliveira; Mendes, Fausto Medeiros; Braga, Mariana Minatel; Raggio, Daniela Prócida; Lenzi, Tathiane Larissa.
  • Cavalheiro, Cleber Paradzinski; s.af
  • Souza, Pablo Soares de; s.af
  • Rocha, Rachel de Oliveira; Federal University of Santa Maria. Department of Stomatology. Santa Maria. BR
  • Mendes, Fausto Medeiros; University of Sao Paulo. School of Dentistry. Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry. São Paulo. BR
  • Braga, Mariana Minatel; University of Sao Paulo. School of Dentistry. Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry. São Paulo. BR
  • Raggio, Daniela Prócida; University of Sao Paulo. School of Dentistry. Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry. São Paulo. BR
  • Lenzi, Tathiane Larissa; s.af
Article in English | LILACS, BBO | ID: biblio-1101281
ABSTRACT
Abstract

Objective:

To assess the reproducibility of two clinical criteria for the evaluation of restorations in primary teeth and the impact on treatment decision. Material and

Methods:

A cross-sectional study was performed selecting 71 resin-based composite restorations placed in primary molars of children who had sought dental treatment at a dental school. Two trained examiners evaluated independently the restorations using modified FDI and USPHS criteria. All restorations were assessed separately with each system in random order to avoid memory bias. Kappa statistics were used to determine inter-examiner reliability considering each parameter of both criteria and score final about treatment decision. McNemar test was used to compare the treatment decision with two criteria. The significance level was set at 5%.

Results:

Kappa values ranged from 0.28 to 0.93 with USPHS and 0.28 to 0.88 with FDI, considering each parameter separately. Inter-examiner agreement for treatment decision was excellent for both criteria (Kappa 0.85-0.90). For clinical decision-making, no difference between criteria was found, irrespective of examiner.

Conclusion:

Low inter-examiner agreement for evaluation of each parameter of USPHS and FDI criteria does not reflect on reproducibility for treatment decision. Both criteria may be suitable for evaluation of composite restorations in primary teeth.
Subject(s)


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Tooth, Deciduous / Dental Care / Dental Restoration Failure / Clinical Decision-Making / Molar Type of study: Evaluation studies / Observational study / Prevalence study / Prognostic study / Risk factors Limits: Child / Female / Humans / Male Country/Region as subject: South America / Brazil Language: English Journal: Pesqui. bras. odontopediatria clín. integr Journal subject: Dentistry Year: 2020 Type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Institution/Affiliation country: Federal University of Santa Maria/BR / University of Sao Paulo/BR

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Tooth, Deciduous / Dental Care / Dental Restoration Failure / Clinical Decision-Making / Molar Type of study: Evaluation studies / Observational study / Prevalence study / Prognostic study / Risk factors Limits: Child / Female / Humans / Male Country/Region as subject: South America / Brazil Language: English Journal: Pesqui. bras. odontopediatria clín. integr Journal subject: Dentistry Year: 2020 Type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Institution/Affiliation country: Federal University of Santa Maria/BR / University of Sao Paulo/BR