Operative Treatment Performance and Acceptance by Preschoolers with Early Childhood Caries in Bogotá, Colombia. Corto (Resumen)

Información de la publicación

Información de la publicación
Tipo de publicación



Investigación y estudios

Medio de publicación

Impreso: Revista indexada


This study aimed at comparing clinical acceptance, pain intensity and 1-year percentage of failure of three class-II-cavity restorative-techniques: amalgam (A), glass-ionomer (GI), and stainless-steel-crown (SSC). 477 economically deprived 3–5-yearolds in Bogotá, Colombia, who had at least one occlusal-proximal cavitated carious lesion in a primary tooth, participated. Restorations were conducted under cotton-roll isolation as follows: A: local-anesthesia, conventional bur preparation, amalgam placement; GI: no local-anesthesia, bur cavity opening, hand-excavator removal of infected-soft dentine, plastic-matrix, glass-ionomer- placement; SSC: no local-anesthesia; infected-soft dentine hand-excavator removal, conservative preparation, glass-ionomer SSC cementation. During the operative procedures the child’s behaviour (Frankl’s Behaviour-Rating-Scale) and pain intensity (Reis-Barreto’s Visual-Analogue-Scale-of-Faces) were assessed.

Baseline examination included: df-s and caries-risk-assessment. Mean age at baseline: 3.8 8 0.7 years; random treatment-allocation: A: 168 = 35%, GI: 162 = 34%, and SSC: 147 = 31%. After 12 months, 258 (54%) restorations were evaluated for failure: dental caries, marginal integrity-loss, restoration/tooth fracture, and pulpal complication. Analyses disclosed no significant differences between remaining and dropout children regarding: age, gender, mean df-s, risk-status, restorative technique, or first-primary- molar-tooth restored (Chi-square test, p values > 0.05). A ‘positive’ to ‘definitely-positive’ behaviour and a ‘very low’ to ‘low’ pain intensity was observed in over 90% of the children, with no significant differences between techniques (Chi-square test, p values > 0.05). The lowest failure percentage was observed for SSC (15%), followed by A (18%) and GI (53%), with significant differences between GI and the two other techniques (ANOVA test; p values <0.05). The most prevalent reasons for restoration failure were marginal-integrity alterations, fractures and dental caries.

<!--0--> To conclude: There was no difference in children’s behavior and pain intensity between the 3 treatments but SSC and A performed significantly better than GI in terms of restoration failure during the first year.

3M-ESPE funded partially this study. The Secretary of District Health – Bogotá contributed with recruiting and following up the sample.


S. Martignon, M. Tellez , L.M. Marin, J.A. Ruiz , A. Padilla , V. Qvist

Registro ISSN




SNIES Categoría


Fecha de publicación 27 de mayo de 2010
Fecha de aceptación 06 de diciembre de 2011
Medio indexado (nombre)

Caries Research

Bases de datos donde está referenciada


Información de apoyo a la difusión
Enlaces 57th Annual ORCA Congress
57th Annual ORCA Congress, Caries Res 2010; 44:171–247 DOI: 10.1159/000315447

Información de contacto

Contacto de Publicaciones