RESUMO
Purpose: To compare the 2-year cumulative survival rates of class II restorations made according to Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) with axial grooves and the high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC) Equia Fil (GC) and the conventional method using the resin composite Filtek Z250 (3M Oral Care). Materials and Methods: A parallel-group study design and a stratified randomization process (DMFS count and cavity size) were applied. Restorations were evaluated according to the ART restoration and USPHS criteria. Data were statistically analyzed using the proportional hazard rate regression model with frailty correction. Results: 272 class II restorations were placed in 131 people (mean age 26.2 years) by two dentists. The dropout rate of restorations was 2.6%. According to ART restoration and USPHS criteria, the 2-year cumulative survival rates of class II ART/HVGIC restorations were 96.2% and 97.0%, respectively, and 97.8% and 98.5%, respectively, for the conventional class II resin-composite restorations. No differences were observed in the cumulative survival rates between the two treatment groups at 2 years (ART criteria: p=0.26; USPHS criteria p=0.23). Conclusion: HVGIC Equia Fil used in the ART method with axial grooves and Filtek Z250 in the conventional method provided high survival rates for restoring class II cavities over 2 years.
Assuntos
Tratamento Dentário Restaurador sem Trauma , Cárie Dentária , Adulto , Resinas Compostas , Restauração Dentária Permanente , Dentição Permanente , Cimentos de Ionômeros de Vidro , Humanos , ViscosidadeRESUMO
Abstract Objective: The aim of the study was to measure empathy levels among UCC dentistry students in 2016 and to compare them with a previous record from 2012 in order to establish if it is possible to improve these levels by emphasizing their importance without any specific training. Material and Methods: The sample was formed by students from 1st to 5th year; 2016:173 (79.36%) and 2012:189 (84.75%). The sample was stratified by academic year and gender. A Spanish version for health science students of Jefferson's Empathy Medical Scale was applied; the version is validated in Mexico and Chile, and culturally adapted by judges in Argentina. Results: In 2016, there was a difference between women and men in empathy in general (F= 108.56, M= 98.859) and in their components, with the exception of "Putting yourself into other's shoes". Both genders tended to decrease empathy in general and its components from 3rd year with a tendency to increase again in 5th year, with the exception of the last component. The difference in empathy in general between students of 5th year and 1st year was assessed in 29.8% of possible growth. The components studied were"Compassionate care" 18.99%, "Taking perspective" 36.84% and "Putting yourself into other's shoes" 6.71%. In the 2012-2016 comparison, the questions that presented significant differences were number 3, 5,10,16,17 and 18. Conclusions: an empathy diagnosis is provided that will help in the elaboration of strategies to incorporate the acquisition of this aptitude into the curriculum of this University's School of Dentistry.
Resumen Objetivo: El objetivo del estudio fue medir los niveles de empatia entre los estudiantes de odontología de UCC en 2016 y compararlos con un registro anterior de 2012 para establecer si es posible mejorarlos al enfatizar su importancia sin ninguna capacitación específica. Material y Métodos: La muestra compuesta por alumnos de 1° a 5° año; 2016:173 (79.36%) y 2012:189 (84.75%) se estratificó por año académico y género. Se aplicó una versión en español para estudiantes de ciencias de la salud de Jefferson's Empathy Medical Scale; La versión está validada en México y Chile, y adaptada culturalmente por jueces en Argentina. Resultados: En 2016, hubo una diferencia entre mujeres y hombres en la empatia en general (F = 108.56, M = 98.859) y en sus componentes, con la excepción de "ponerse en el lugar del otro". Ambos géneros tendieron a disminuir la empatía en general y sus componentes a partir del tercer año con una tendencia a aumentar nuevamente en el quinto año, con la excepción del último componente. La diferencia en la empatia en general entre los estudiantes de 5° y 1° año se evaluó en el 29,8% de posible crecimiento. "Atención compasiva" 18.99%, "Tomando perspectiva" 36.84% y "Poniéndose en el lugar del otro" 6.71%. En la comparación 2012-2016, las preguntas que presentaron diferencias significativas fueron los números 3, 5,10,16,17 y 18. Conclusiones: Se proporciona un diagnóstico de empatía que ayudará en la elaboración de estrategias para incorporar la adquisición de esta aptitud en el currículo de esta Escuela Universitaria de Odontología.
