Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Shilpa M, Jain J, Shahid F, Gufran K, Sam G, Khan MS
    J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2019 May;11(Suppl 2):S246-S251.
    PMID: 31198346 DOI: 10.4103/JPBS.JPBS_1_19
    Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of three types of plaque control methods among 13- to 35-year-old subjects receiving fixed orthodontic treatment in Coorg Institute of Dental Sciences, Virajpet, Coorg district, Karnataka, India.

    Materials and Methods: A total of 111 subjects who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomly included in the study. The subjects were recalled after 1 month of the commencement of fixed orthodontic treatment for the recording of baseline data including plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and modified papillary bleeding index (MPBI). After recording of the baseline data, the subjects were randomly allocated into each of the intervention groups, i.e., group A (manual tooth brush), group B (powered tooth brush), and group C (manual tooth brush combined with mouthwash) by lottery method. Further, all the subjects were recalled after 1 and 2 months for recording the data.

    Results: Regarding plaque levels, it was seen that there was a highly statistically significant difference between the three groups (P = 0.001), with the manual tooth brush combined with chlorhexidine mouthwash group recording the lowest mean PI score of 0.5 ± 0.39. A comparison of the mean GI scores among the groups at the end of 2 months shows a highly statistically significant difference (P = 0.001). The mean MPBI scores at the end of 2 months were highly statistically significant among the three groups (P = 0.001), with the group C recording the lowest mean MPBI score of 0.3 ± 0.3.

    Conclusion: The powered tooth brush group subjects exhibited significantly lesser PI, GI, and MPBI scores than the manual tooth brush group at the end of 2 months, whereas the manual tooth brush combined with chlorhexidine mouth wash group subjects showed maximum improvement, having significantly lesser PI and GI scores than the powered tooth brush group.

  2. Jafar Abdulla MU, Dafer Al Wadei MH, El-Patal MA, Sam G, Abokhlifa YH, Thorat A
    J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2021 Jun;13(Suppl 1):S616-S619.
    PMID: 34447165 DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_617_20
    Aim: The present study is aimed to assess the marginal integrity and color stability of provisional restorations fabricated from different autopolymerizing acrylic resins.

    Materials and Methods: Totally, 60 provisional crowns were fabricated. A mandibular first molar artificial typodont was mounted on a base of dental stone. The mandibular first molar which was mounted was prepared for full cast crown, using the tooth preparation standard principles with shoulder finish line of 1 mm and taper 6°. There were 20 samples in each acrylic resin group: Group I: Polyvinyl-ethyl methacrylate resin, Group II: Autopolymerizing bis-acrylic material, and Group III: Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) autopolymerizing resin. Crowns were verified for marginal adaptation using stereomicroscope at a ×40. The color stability was measured using spectrophotometer poststaining period.

    Results: Autopolymerizing bis-acrylic material group showed minimum mean vertical marginal discrepancy (128.68 ± 18.036 μm) followed by PMMA autopolymerizing resin group (147.49 ± 20.128 μm) and polyvinyl-ethyl methacrylate resin group (172.89 ± 22.118 μm). Analysis of variance demonstrated a statistically significant difference between different autopolymerizing acrylic resins. The color change values did not show any significant difference between the groups on numerous comparisons between different autopolymerizing acrylic resin groups. A statistically significant difference was seen between Groups I and II, Groups I and III, and Groups II and III (P < 0.05).

    Conclusion: This study concluded that the autopolymerizing bis-acrylic material demonstrated significantly improved marginal integrity when compared to PMMA autopolymerizing resin and polyvinyl-ethyl methacrylate resin.

  3. Varghese E, Samson RS, Thomas A, Sam G, Hota S, Sahoo N
    J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2023 Jul;15(Suppl 1):S463-S466.
    PMID: 37654307 DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_637_22
    AIM: The aim of the current research was to assess the ability of different dental varnishes in averting enamel demineralization adjoining the orthodontic brackets.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five premolars devoid of dental caries that were subjected to extraction for orthodontic purposes were employed in this research. The surface of enamel was etched with 37% phosphoric acid and subjected to primer application. Individual brackets were placed on the midregion of the buccal surfaces of the premolars with Transbond™ XT adhesive. Postbracket bonding, the dry premolar tooth samples were set aside cautiously. The samples were then allocated to three groups: Group I: Duraphat Varnish, Group II: Clinpro XT Varnish, and Group III: Profluorid Varnish. Every sample was independently subjected to immersion in demineralizing solution for a period of 96 h at 37°C in an incubator. Areas of demineralization were evaluated by documenting the microhardness along the severed surface using a microhardness tester equipped with a Vickers diamond.

    RESULTS: The highest surface microhardness was noted with Profluorid Varnish group at 328.48 ± 1.12 in pursuit by Clinpro XT Varnish group at 322.08 ± 0.04 as well as Duraphat Varnish group at 307.42 ± 0.28 with a statistically noteworthy dissimilarity amid the groups.

    CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the three varnishes employed had an influence on the prevention of enamel demineralization surrounding the orthodontic brackets. Profluorid varnish however exhibited maximum efficiency in avoiding enamel demineralization versus Clinpro XT varnish as well as Duraphat varnish group.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links