View the CAT printer-friendly / share this CAT
Title Retention of Resin Based Sealants Compared With Glass Ionomer Sealants to Prevent Dental caries In Children
Clinical Question What is more retentive as a sealant to prevent dental decay in children, resin based or glass ionomer sealants?
Clinical Bottom Line In posterior teeth that are sealed resin based sealants are more retentive and offer slightly more protection from dental decay than those sealed with glass ionomers.
Best Evidence (you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link)
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
#1) 18086027Kervanto-Seppaial/2008599 children in the age group of 12–16 years in a split mouth designRandomized clinical trial utilizing a split mouth design
Key results599 children were followed for 3 years after the placement of resin based sealants and glass ionomer sealants. The same type of sealant was placed on both the maxillary and mandibular 2nd molars of either the left or right side, so that each patient had both types of sealants placed in their mouths. “The effectiveness of the retention rate for RB sealants was 94.8% and the rate difference 87.2% (95% CI 83.86%, 90.50%). The relative risk during the 3-year study period of having a defective or lost RB sealant was 0.052 (95% CI 0.036, 0.075) when compared to having a defective or lost GIC sealant. The relative risk for RB-sealed surfaces vs. GIC-sealed surfaces of having detectable dentin caries was 0.26 (95% CI 0.12, 0.57).” Conclusion that resin based sealants were more effective for retention and caries prevention
#2) 19055885 Amin/200845 children aged 7-10 years old with newly erupted permanent 1st molarsRandomized clinical trial
Key results45 children aged 7-10 years old were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 sealant treatment groups. Group 1 sealed with conventional resin based sealants, group 2 sealed with resin modified glass ionomer, and group 3 sealed with flowable composite. The groups were followed up for sealant retention, caries and Streptococcus mutans levels at 1 day, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. “Group 1 and Group 3 showed significantly higher retention rates than Group 2 fissure sealant (p<0.05). There were no differences of the caries-preventive effects between the tested sealant materials throughout the duration of the study.
Evidence Search PubMed; Sealants; with Limits Randomized Controlled Trial, English, All Child 0-18 years
Comments on
The Evidence
Both studies did not mention if the clinicians were blinded to which groups had which sealant placed.
Applicability Both studies did not mention if the clinicians were blinded to which groups had which sealant placed.
Specialty/Discipline (Public Health) (General Dentistry) (Pediatric Dentistry) (Restorative Dentistry) (Basic Science)
Keywords Sealant, retention, caries, and bacteria
ID# 268
Date of submission: 11/11/2009spacer
E-mail cushen@livemail.uthscsa.edu
Author Sarra Cushen, DDS, MS
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor/Co-author
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
post a rationale
None available
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
post a comment
by Andrew Nguyen (San Antonio, TX) on 08/29/2013
In several studies it has demonstrated that resin-based sealants are effective than GI sealant in retention and marginal seal. However, other studies have shown that there’s no significant difference between resin-based sealants and GI sealants. Additional studies should be done to determine if the significant differences in resin-based sealants and GI sealants equate to clinical differences in the two materials.

Return to Found CATs list