Use of Sealants in Permanent Molars by Brazilian Dentist: A Comparative Study of Public versus Private

Objective: To compare the use of sealants in permanent molars between public and private dentists in Brazil. Material and Methods: This was a cross-sectional and analytical web survey study. The convenience sample consisted of dentists in Brazil who answered a pre-tested online form released via social media between July and October 2021. Descriptive analysis was performed using absolute and relative frequencies (%) and associations using the Chi-square test (p<0.05). Results: Brazilian professionals participated in the study (n=2,244). Comparing the professionals from the public service with those from the private service, the former had a higher positive perception of the use of sealants as a preventive (92.4% vs. 81.1%, p<0.001) and therapeutic procedure (90.7% vs. 82.4%, p=0.001), higher percentage of non-invasive (91.7% vs. 83.8%, p<0.001) and invasive (22.8% vs. 12.0%, p< 0.001) techniques. Professionals from the private service reported more frequently that they did not use sealants than those from the public service (14.0% vs. 4.8%, p<0.001). Resin sealant (97.7% vs. 94.9%, p=0.015) and Flow resin (62.0% vs. 54.3%, p=0.013) were the most used by professionals in the private service. The use of glass ionomer cement was not associated with the type of service (75.1% vs. 77.2%, p=0.172), nor was the use of adhesives (0.6% vs. 1.4%, p=0.195) or resin with Giomer technology (1.9% vs. 2.2%, p=0.856) (p>0.05). Conclusion: The percentage of use of sealants among dentists in Brazil is high, especially among professionals in the public service, and the most used materials were resinous sealants and glass ionomer cement

Use of Sealants in Permanent Molars by Brazilian Dentist: A Comparative Study of Public versus Private

Objective: To compare the use of sealants in permanent molars between public and private dentists in Brazil. Material and Methods: This was a cross-sectional and analytical web survey study. The convenience sample consisted of dentists in Brazil who answered a pre-tested online form released via social media between July and October 2021. Descriptive analysis was performed using absolute and relative frequencies (%) and associations using the Chi-square test (p0.05). Conclusion: The percentage of use of sealants among dentists in Brazil is high, especially among professionals in the public service, and the most used materials were resinous sealants and glass ionomer cement

Effectiveness of iodoform-based filling materials in root canal treatment of deciduous teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction The objective was to review the effectiveness of iodoform-based compared to noniodoform-based filling materials in the root canal treatment of deciduous teeth.Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis used randomized clinical trials with six months or more follow-up. The risk of bias of individual studies and the certainty of the evidence were evaluated (Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE, respectively).Results The initial search resulted in 5,127 studies after removal of duplicates. After screening by title and abstract, 34 full-text studies were eligible and 21 remained in the qualitative synthesis and 19 in the meta-analysis. Iodoform-based filling materials resulted in fewer clinical failures when compared to noniodoform-based filling materials at the 6 months (OR = 0.43, 95%CI: 0.19–0.97, p = .04) and 9–12 months (OR = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.23–0.93, p = .03), but not at the 18–30 months follow-up (OR = 1.08, 95%CI: 0.58–2.03, p = .81). When considering radiographic failures, there was no statistical difference between iodoform-based and noniodoform-based filling materials at the 6 months (OR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.39–1.32, p = .29) and 18–30 months follow-ups (OR = 1.06, 95%CI: 0.51–2.21, p = .87), but fewer radiographic failures were detected at the 9–12 months follow-up (OR = 0.49, 95%CI: 0.29–0.80, p = .005).Conclusion Iodoform-based filling materials showed better clinical and radiographic performance when compared to non-iodoform-based filling materials in the short term, and similar performance in the long term. However, most of the studies exhibited unclear or high risk of bias and the overall certainty of the evidence ranged from low to very low. Therefore, new randomized clinical trials must be accomplished to corroborate this conclusion