Comparison of Two Universal Composites in Posterior Teeth
NCT ID: NCT02888873
Last Updated: 2016-09-05
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2014-05-31
2016-05-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Clinical Evaluation of Flowable Monochromatic and Polychromatic Composite Resins in Posterior Restorations
NCT07289022
Clinical Evaluation of a Bioactive Material
NCT04825379
Evaluation of 2-year Clinical Performance of Two Different Single Color Universal Composite Resin Restorative Materials.
NCT06125132
CLINICAL COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT GLASS IONOMER-BASED RESTORATIVES AND A BULK-FILL RESIN COMPOSITE IN CLASS I CAVITIES: A 48-MONTH RANDOMIZED SPLIT-MOUTH CONTROLLED TRIAL
NCT05559333
Evaluation of ART Restorations Using Two Different Bulk-Fill Restorative Materials in Primary Molars
NCT06771362
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Charisma
applied randomly
Charisma
The surfaces were etched using 35% phosphoric acid for 30 s. The etched surfaces were rinsed and dried. Charisma was used in combination Gluma2 Bond etch\&rinse adhesive. The composite resin restorations were light-cured (600 milliwatt/cm²). Occlusion was checked with thin articulating papers.
Restoration surfaces were finished and polished with fine finishing diamond burs, stones and rubber cups.
Charisma classic
applied randomly
Charisma Classic
The surfaces were etched using 35% phosphoric acid for 30 s. The etched surfaces were rinsed and dried. Charisma classic was used in combination Gluma2 Bond etch\&rinse adhesive. The composite resin restorations were light-cured (600 milliwatt/cm²). Occlusion was checked with thin articulating papers.
Restoration surfaces were finished and polished with fine finishing diamond burs, stones and rubber cups.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Charisma
The surfaces were etched using 35% phosphoric acid for 30 s. The etched surfaces were rinsed and dried. Charisma was used in combination Gluma2 Bond etch\&rinse adhesive. The composite resin restorations were light-cured (600 milliwatt/cm²). Occlusion was checked with thin articulating papers.
Restoration surfaces were finished and polished with fine finishing diamond burs, stones and rubber cups.
Charisma Classic
The surfaces were etched using 35% phosphoric acid for 30 s. The etched surfaces were rinsed and dried. Charisma classic was used in combination Gluma2 Bond etch\&rinse adhesive. The composite resin restorations were light-cured (600 milliwatt/cm²). Occlusion was checked with thin articulating papers.
Restoration surfaces were finished and polished with fine finishing diamond burs, stones and rubber cups.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* the presence of teeth to be restored in occlusion
* teeth that were symptomless and vital
* a normal periodontal status
* a good likelihood of recall availability.
Exclusion Criteria
* absence of adjacent and antagonist teeth
* poor periodontal status
* adverse medical history
* potential behavioral problems.
18 Years
38 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Hacettepe University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Zeynep Bilge Kutuk
Research Assistant
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Sevil Gurgan, DDS, PhD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Hacettepe University School of Dentistry
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hacettepe University School of Dentistry
Ankara, , Turkey (Türkiye)
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Gurgan S, Vural UK, Kutuk ZB, Cakir FY. Comparison of two universal composites in posterior teeth: preliminary report. J Dent Res (Spec Iss 94 B): 308, 2015
Gurgan S, Koc Vural U, Kutuk ZB, Cakir FY. Does a new formula have an input in the clinical success of posterior composite restorations? A chat study. Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Apr;25(4):1715-1727. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03472-5. Epub 2020 Aug 3.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2014/03-13(KA-14005)
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.