IADR Abstract Archives
SEAL Cambodia – A Comparison of Two Protocols
Objectives: After the pilot study of the SEAL Cambodia project showed poor retention of Fuji VII sealants, the purpose of this study was to make changes to the clinical protocol in order to improve results.
Methods: 149 children were selected for a randomised controlled trial (Intervention = 106, Control = 43). Children were included if they had four non-cavitated first permanent molars, were in grade I or II, and their school was designated by the Ministry of Education to be treated during the week of the study. The regular SEAL protocol was used for the control group and a modified protocol was used for the intervention group. This included alterations in the placement technique and placing Fuji IX and Fuji VII in a split mouth design. Children were followed-up at one-week and at one-month.
Results: For those sealants placed using Fuji VII, there was a significant difference (P=<0.05; χ2) in the number of sealants that were sound and the number of sealants that were partially lost after one month between the control (63.9% , 23.9%) and the intervention (76.5%, 16.0%). There was no significant difference in the proportion of sealants that were completely lost at one month. When Fuji VII and Fuji IX were compared within the intervention group, there was no significant difference at 1-week but there was a significant (P=0.005; χ2) difference in the proportion of sound sealants at one month (Fuji VII = 76.5%, Fuji IX = 64.2%).
Conclusions: Fuji VII has significantly better retention at one month than Fuji I X when using this protocol. The new protocol renders better retention of sealants than the old protocol and has adopted by all partners. Fuji VII appears to be a better material to use for sealing compared with Fuji IX at one month.
Methods: 149 children were selected for a randomised controlled trial (Intervention = 106, Control = 43). Children were included if they had four non-cavitated first permanent molars, were in grade I or II, and their school was designated by the Ministry of Education to be treated during the week of the study. The regular SEAL protocol was used for the control group and a modified protocol was used for the intervention group. This included alterations in the placement technique and placing Fuji IX and Fuji VII in a split mouth design. Children were followed-up at one-week and at one-month.
Results: For those sealants placed using Fuji VII, there was a significant difference (P=<0.05; χ2) in the number of sealants that were sound and the number of sealants that were partially lost after one month between the control (63.9% , 23.9%) and the intervention (76.5%, 16.0%). There was no significant difference in the proportion of sealants that were completely lost at one month. When Fuji VII and Fuji IX were compared within the intervention group, there was no significant difference at 1-week but there was a significant (P=0.005; χ2) difference in the proportion of sound sealants at one month (Fuji VII = 76.5%, Fuji IX = 64.2%).
Conclusions: Fuji VII has significantly better retention at one month than Fuji I X when using this protocol. The new protocol renders better retention of sealants than the old protocol and has adopted by all partners. Fuji VII appears to be a better material to use for sealing compared with Fuji IX at one month.