ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In the era of Covid 19 pandemic, the audio-visual contents of YouTube™ could be an information source for dental students, practitioners, and patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality, content, and demographics of YouTube™ videos about pediatric dentistry for the education of dentistry students. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search on YouTube™ was performed using the keywords "pediatric dentistry", "pediatric dental treatments", "primary teeth treatments" in Turkish. The first 50 videos selected for each keyword were evaluated. Parameters of the videos such as the number of views, the days since the upload, the duration of the video, and the number of likes and dislikes were recorded. Videos are categorized by upload source and content categories as an academic, dentist, physician, patient, reporter, and other, and average points are obtained for the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark. The normality of the data was evaluated with the Shapiro-Wilk test. The data were not distributed normally, compared with the Kruskal Wallis test between source and content groups. The Dunn's Post Hoc was used to determine to find out which group caused the difference. The Spearman Correlation coefficient was calculated to assess a possible correlation between JAMA, GQS, and VPI scores. All significance levels were set at 0.05. RESULTS: The duplicates and non-related ones were removed from 150 videos and remaining 119 videos were evaluated. Most of the videos were uploaded by the dentists and other categories, and mainly the videos were uploaded for patient education. JAMA score was 1 out of 4 for 55 videos, 2 for 63 videos, and 3 for only 1 video. When the video source groups were compared, the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.01). The difference between academic and patient groups (p = 0.007); the dentist and patient groups were statistically significant (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: YouTube platform does not contain videos of appropriate quality to support the education of dentistry students in pediatric dentistry in Turkish.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Media , United States , Humans , Child , Reproducibility of Results , Information Sources , Pediatric Dentistry , Video Recording , COVID-19/epidemiology , Information DisseminationABSTRACT
Background: The aim of this split-mouth design research was to compare the clinical performance of a glass-ionomer cement system on Class I/II cavities against the clinical performance of bulk-fill resin composite restoration materials. Methods: Thirty-five patients were randomized and enrolled in the study, aged between 10 and 12 years, all of whom had a matched pair of permanent mandibular carious molars with similar Class I/II. A total of 70 restoration placements were performed. The patients were each given two restorations consisting of either a glass-ionomer cement with a nano-filled coating or a bulk-fill resin composite after the use of a self-etch adhesive. The cumulative survival rates were estimated using log-rank test and the Kaplan−Meier method. For comparison of the restorative materials in line with the modified Ryge, the McNemar test and the Wilcoxon signed rank test were employed. Results: With regard to retention, the glass-ionomer cement system and bulk-fill resin composite performed similarly in permanent molars in Class I/II cavities over a period of up to 24-months (p > 0.05). Over the 24-month period, Class I restorations showed statistically better survival rates than Class II restorations (p < 0.05). In the case of glass-ionomer cement systems, over the two-year period, more common chipping and surface degradations were observed. Conclusions: The glass-ionomer cement system and bulk-fill resin composite restorative materials display good clinical performance over a period of 24-months.
ABSTRACT
Background: Deep fissures are highly unprotected from the development of caries. Resin-based materials and glass-ionomer cements for sealing fissures are useful in caries control through physical barrier formation, which prohibits metabolic exchange between fissure microorganisms. Retention is one of the most critical properties of fissure sealants. This in vivo study is aimed at comparing and evaluating the clinical efficacy of resin and glass ionomer-based fissure sealants on first permanent molars with follow-ups at 6-, 12-, and 18-month intervals. Methods: A randomized split-mouth design clinical study was conducted after obtaining the ethical committee approval. A total of 50 patients, aged between 7 and 12 years, were randomized and enrolled in the study to perform a total of 200 sealant placements on all four caries-free and hypoplasia-free first permanent molars having deep fissures, which are susceptible to caries, were included in this study. The four permanent molars were divided into the following four groups: group A (control), B (Grandioseal, Voco, Germany), C (Smartseal & Loc, Detax Gmbh & Co, Germany), and D (Fuji triage capsule, GC, Belgium). The sealed molars were clinically evaluated at intervals of 6, 12, and 18 months to assess sealant retention, surface roughness, marginal coloration, and caries status through visual evaluation of the sealant by two evaluators. Results: Concerning retention, there were statistically significant differences between the sealants in terms of the survival of partial and fully retained sealants as well as in the survival of caries-free teeth. Two resin-based (Smartseal & Loc) and glass-ionomer cement (Fuji triage) sealants showed significantly similar performances in permanent molars for up to 18 months. In terms of retention, one of the resin-based (Grandioseal) sealants performed better as compared to the others and showed better caries prevention in deep fissures. Conclusion: It is concluded that both the sealants had comparable retention and caries-preventive effects in 7 to 12-year-old children and can be considered as suitable sealants for a period of at least 18 months in moderate caries risk patients.
