ONE-YEAR CLINICAL EVALUATION OF CLASS II INDIRECT PORCELAIN, HYBRID AND COMPOSITE BLOCKS RESTORATIONS
Cumhuriyet Dental Journal, ISSN: 2146-2852, Vol: 24, Issue: 1, Page: 66-75
2021
- 1Citations
- 9Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Objectives: This clinical study aims to evaluate the clinical performance of indirect class II restorations made using three different CAD/CAM blocks. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 indirect class II restorations were performed in 41 patients using Cerasmart (GC Dental Products Europe, Leuven, Belgium) composite, IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) ceramic and Vita Enamic (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Sackingen, Germany) hybrid blocks. The restorations were evaluated for 13 different criteria using modified FDI criteria at the end of one week, six months, and one year. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square, Fischer and Mc Nemar tests. Results: Vita Enamic indirect restorations showed a statistically significant difference in terms of color matching criteria from Cerasmart and IPS e.max CAD using groups in all follow-up periods (p<0.05). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of other criteria (p>0.05). Conclusion: Cerasmart and IPS e.max CAD restorations showed better color matching than Vita Enamic restorations.
Bibliographic Details
Cumhuriyet University
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know