Journal of International Oral Health

ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Year
: 2021  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 10--16

Clinical evaluation of sectional matrix versus circumferential matrix for reproduction of proximal contact by undergraduate students and postgraduate dentists: A randomized controlled trial


Omar Osama Shaalan, Shereen Hafez Ibrahim 
 Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Omar Osama Shaalan
Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt, Postal address: 35 Mohamad Farid Street El Hay El Motamayz, Sixth of October City, Giza.
Egypt

Aim: In clinical practice, obtaining physiologic proximal contact points is essential for protection of balance and harmony of the stomatognathic system. Consequently, challenges have emerged due to the technique sensitivity of the restorative procedures of posterior proximal resin composite restorations. This study aimed at assessing the influence of different matricing techniques; either sectional matrix or circumferential matrix and operator experience; either undergraduate students or postgraduate dentists on reproduction of optimum proximal contacts for posterior proximal resin composite restorations. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 patients were enrolled; after class II cavity preparation, matrix systems were applied by undergraduate students or postgraduate dentists, by using either sectional matrix or circumferential matrix systems. Cavity preparations were restored by using resin composite restorations according to manufacturers’ instructions. Tightness of proximal contacts was evaluated by using dental floss according to FDI recommendations to be either optimum, tight, or open contact. Chi-square test was used to compare between groups; P value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Relative risk (RR) was used to determine the clinical significance. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the sectional matricing technique and the circumferential matricing technique (P < 0.0001). There was less risk of poor proximal contact (tight or open) with the sectional matrix system, and the risk was 70% less than the circumferential matrix. Conclusions: Optimum contact points were highly associated with the sectional matrix system. Open and tight contacts were highly associated with the circumferential matrix system regardless of operator experience.


How to cite this article:
Shaalan OO, Ibrahim SH. Clinical evaluation of sectional matrix versus circumferential matrix for reproduction of proximal contact by undergraduate students and postgraduate dentists: A randomized controlled trial.J Int Oral Health 2021;13:10-16


How to cite this URL:
Shaalan OO, Ibrahim SH. Clinical evaluation of sectional matrix versus circumferential matrix for reproduction of proximal contact by undergraduate students and postgraduate dentists: A randomized controlled trial. J Int Oral Health [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 Feb 26 ];13:10-16
Available from: https://www.jioh.org/article.asp?issn=0976-7428;year=2021;volume=13;issue=1;spage=10;epage=16;aulast=Shaalan;type=0