DryShield vs Cotton Roll Isolation During Sealants Placement: Efficiency and Patient Preference
Condition: Time; Patient Preference
Study type: Interventional

Summary: 
      The goals of this study are to determine if 1) placement times of pit and fissure sealants
      using the DryShield system differ from those when using the cotton roll isolation technique;
      and 2) there is a significant difference in patient preference between Dryshield and the
      cotton roll technique.
    

Detailed description: 
      Pit and fissure caries account for 80 to 90 percent of all caries in permanent posterior
      teeth. Pit-and-fissure sealants can be used effectively to prevent caries. By
      micromechanically bonding to the teeth, they provide a physical barrier that keeps
      microorganisms and food particles from collecting in susceptible pits and fissures, thus
      preventing caries initiation and arresting caries progression. The effectiveness of sealants
      for caries prevention depends on long-term retention, which is largely a function of
      meticulousness of application: keeping the tooth surface free from saliva contamination
      during application and polymerization is critical. Low retention of sealants has been
      attributed to insufficient moisture control. Therefore, proper isolation of the teeth is one
      of the most important steps when placing sealants to ensure their retention. Cotton roll
      isolation (CRI) has been widely used for sealant placement, and is the most common method
      among pediatric dentists. Although very effective, CRI can be a challenging technique
      especially when used in young children: the cotton rolls can be cumbersome for both the
      patient and the clinician. A previous study demonstrated that new moisture control systems
      such as Isolite, produce sealant retention rates comparable to cotton roll isolation, while
      decreasing procedure time. DryShield (DS) has recently been introduced as an all-in-one
      isolation system. It is similar to the Isolite as it combines the tasks of fluid evacuation,
      tongue and cheek retraction, and serves as a bite block, but differs in that it's
      autoclavable and does not provide illumination. Its design allows it to suction and isolate
      half the oral cavity at a time. Therefore, it should presumably facilitate sealants placement
      under a more controlled environment, while reducing chair time for the dentist.

      The goals of this study are to determine if 1) placement times of pit and fissure sealants
      using the DryShield system differ from those when using the cotton roll isolation technique;
      and 2) there is a significant difference in patient preference between DryShield and the
      cotton roll technique.
    

Intervention name(s): DryShield; Cotton rolls
Intervention type(s): Device; Other
Intervention description(s): DryShield (DS) is an all-in-one isolation system. It combines the tasks of fluid evacuation, tongue and cheek retraction, and serves as a bite block. Its design allows it to suction and isolate half the oral cavity at a time.; Cotton Roll Isolation requires placing cotton rolls along the buccal mucosa, especially over the parotid glands ducts for maxillary teeth. For the mandibular teeth, the cotton rolls are placed in the buccal vestibule and the floor of the mouth (between the lower buccal mucosa and underneath and/or between the tongue). With this technique, a high-speed evacuation of saliva and water is used.
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention model: Crossover Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)
Primary purpose: Basic Science
Keywords: Sealants; Dryshield; Cotton roll; Isolation; Efficiency; Preference