Comparison of Retention of Self-etch Sealants and Flowable Composite in Permanent Molars

NCT06895096 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: FUCDCLINIC-2407
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 46
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Comparison of Retention of Self-etch sealants and Flowable Composite in permanent Molars.

Conditions

Pits and Fissures Sealant

Keywords

flowable composite; self-etch sealant; sealant retention

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• sealant retention

  observation as to whether sealant is completely retained ,partially retained or completely lost

  from enrollment to end of treatment at 6 months

Study Arms (1)

Retention of self-Etch sealants vs flowable composite in contralateral molars

Comparison of retention of self-etch sealants and flowable composite in inter-arch contralateral molars

Device: Pit Fissure Sealant

Interventions

Pit Fissure Sealant DEVICE

Flowable composite is being used for the purpose of sealing pits and fissures which require etching and bonding before application whereas self etch sealants are self adhesive and do not require etching and sealing.

Retention of self-Etch sealants vs flowable composite in contralateral molars

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 8 Years - 18 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients reporting to Paedodontics and Operative dentistry department of FUCD\&H will be selected according to inclusion criteria after history, clinical examination \& radiographic evaluation.

You may qualify if:

• Patients aged between 8 to 18 years.
• Patients with completely erupted maxillary and mandibular molars with deep pits and fissures having a score of 0 or 1 according to ICDAS classification -

You may not qualify if:

• Patients with a history of any medical conditions such as Sjogren's syndrome , renal failure or have immunocompromised state (juvenile diabetes).
• Patients with history of prolonged medication such as steroids, chemotherapy or TB medication.
• Teeth with carious lesion extending to dentino-enamel junction/dentin.
• Patients with poor oral hygiene.
• Patients with bruxism or parafunctional habits.
• Permanent molars with developmental defects or restorations.
• Teeth with poor prognosis and having periodontal diseases.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Foundation University Islamabad: lead

Study Sites (1)

Foundation university college of Dentistry and Hospital

Rawalpindi, Punjab Province, 46000, Pakistan

Location

Related Publications (1)

• Singh C, Kaur K, Kapoor K. Retention of pit and fissure sealant versus flowable composite: An in vivo one-year comparative evaluation. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2019 Oct-Dec;37(4):372-377. doi: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_122_19.

  PMID: 31710012 BACKGROUND

Related Links

• Retention of pit and fissure sealant versus flowable composite: An in vivo one-year comparative evaluation

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: COHORT
• Time Perspective: PROSPECTIVE
• Target Duration: 06 Months
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Associate Professor

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: March 19, 2025
• First Posted: March 26, 2025
• Study Start: June 1, 2024
• Primary Completion: February 28, 2025
• Study Completion: March 20, 2025
• Last Updated: June 3, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-06

Locations

PA (1)