Uso de aislamiento absoluto con dique de goma en tratamientos restaurativos por rehabilitadores orales en el departamento de Antioquia

José Luis Gutiérrez-Pineda, Juan Camilo Robayo-Falla, Rafael Fernández-Grisales, Sebastián Muñoz-Zapata

Resumen


Introducción y Objetivo: El aislamiento absoluto del campo operatorio condique de goma (DG), es esencial para el resultado exitoso del tratamientoendodóntico y restaurador. A la fecha, no existe evidencia científica que soportesu uso entre rehabilitadores orales. Los propósitos de este estudiofueron: determinar la frecuencia del uso de DG como método de aislamientoabsoluto, identificar que variables sociodemográficas influenciaron su uso yconocer las principales razones de su uso o no por rehabilitadores orales deldepartamento de Antioquia durante los procedimientos restaurativos. Materialesy métodos: Una encuesta autodiligenciable con 17 preguntas fuehecha a 77 rehabilitadores orales. Un análisis estadístico descriptivo univariadoy bivariado utilizando la prueba de chi cuadrado de Pearson fue utilizadopara determinar la asociación entre los factores demográficos y el usoo no del DG (P <0.05). Resultados: En general, la prevalencia del uso del DGfue de 89,6% intervalo de confianza (IC) 95% (82,8%- 96,4%), siendo mayoren el sector posterior 61,1%, seguido por 55,9% en el sector anterior, 19,5%cementación de postes y 14,3% en la elaboración de postes. Mientras la faltade tiempo con 44,2% y no ver la necesidad 28,6%, fueron las razones másprevalentes para omitir el uso del DG; el control de la humedad con 81,8% ymejorar la adhesión 71,4%, justificaron su uso. La experiencia clínica fue laúnica variable que influenció el uso del DG (P = 0.03). Conclusión: El uso deDG fue más frecuente para el sector posterior que el anterior, y frecuentementeomitido para la elaboración y cementación de postes.

 

Use of absolute isolation with rubber dam in restorativetreatments by oral rehabilitators in the department ofAntioquia

Introduction and Objective: The absolute isolation of the operative field with rubberdam (DG), is essential for the successful outcome of the endodontic and restorativetreatment. To date, there is no scientific evidence to support its use among oral rehabilitators.The purposes of this study were: to determine the frequency of the use ofDG as a method of absolute isolation, to identify which socio-demographic variablesinfluenced its use, and to know the main reasons for its use or not by oral rehabilitatorsof the department of Antioquia during the restorative procedures. Materials and methods: A self-diligent survey with 17 questions was done to 77 oral rehabilitators.A descriptive uni-variate and bivariate statistical analysis using Pearson’s chi-squaretest was used to determine the association between demographic factors and theuse or not of the DG (P <0.05). Results: In general, the prevalence of the use of theDG was 89.6% confidence interval, 95% (82.8% - 96.4%), being higher in the posteriorsector 61.1%, followed by 55.9% in the previous sector, 19.5% post cementationand 14, 3% in the development of posts. Meanwhile, the lack of time with 44.2% andnot seeing the need 28.6%, were the most prevalent reasons for omitting the use ofthe DG; the humidity control with 81.8% and improve the adhesion 71.4%, justifiedits use. Clinical experience was the only variable that influenced the use of DG (P =0.03). Conclusion: The use of DG was more frequent for the posterior sector than theprevious one, and frequently omitted for the elaboration and cementation of posts.

Keywords: Isolation, Rubber dam, Survey, Oral rehabilitation.

 

Uso de isolamento absoluto com represa de borrachaem tratamentos reativos por reabilitadores oral nodepartamento de Antioquia

Introdução e Objetivo: O isolamento absoluto do campo operatório com o dique deborracha (DG) é essencial para o sucesso do tratamento endodôntico e restaurador.Até o momento, não há evidências científicas para apoiar seu uso entre reabilitadoresorais do departamento de Antioquia. Os objetivos deste estudo foram: Determinara frequência do uso de GD como método de isolamento absoluto, identificarquais variáveis sociodemográficas estão sendo utilizadas e conhecer as principaisrazões para seu uso ou não por reabilitadores orais da comunidade do Departamento deAntioquia, durante os procedimentos restaurativos. Materiais e métodos: Foi realizadoum inquérito auto-diligente com 17 questões a 77 reabilitadores orais. Umaanálise estatística descritiva univariada e bivariada, utilizando o teste qui-quadradode Pearson, foi utilizada para determinar a associação entre fatores demográficose o uso ou não do GD. (P<0,05). Resultados: Em geral, a prevalência do uso do GDfoi de 89,6% de intervalo de confiança, 95% (82,8% - 96,4%), sendo maior no setorsubsequente 61,1%, seguido por 55,9% no setor anterior, 19,5% pós-cimentação e14, 3% no desenvolvimento de posts. Enquanto isso, a falta de tempo com 44,2% enão a necessidade de 28,6%, foram os motivos mais prevalentes para omitir o usodo GD; o controle de umidade com 81,8% e melhora a adesão de 71,4%, justificouseu uso. A experiência clínica foi a única variável que influenciou o uso de GD (P=0,03). Conclusão: O uso de GD foi mais frequente para o setor posterior do que oanterior, e freqüentemente omitido para a elaboração e cimentação de postes.Palavras-chave: Isolamento, Represa de borracha, Pesquisa, Reabilitação oral.


Palabras clave


Aislamiento, Dique de goma, Encuesta, Rehabilitación oral.

Texto completo:

PDF

Referencias


European Society of Endodontology. Quality guidelines for endodontic treatment: consensus report of the European Society of Endodontology. Int Endod J. 2006;39(12):921-930.

Ammann P, Kolb A, Lussi A, Seemann R. Influence of rubber dam on objective and subjective parameters of stress during dental treatment of children and adolescents - a randomized controlled clinical pilot study. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2013;23(2):110-115.

Cochran MA, Miller CH, Sheldrake MA. The efficacy of the rubber dam as a barrier to the spread of microorganisms during dental treatment. J Am Dent Assoc. 1989;119(1):141-144.

Samaranayake LP, Reid J, Evans D. The efficacy of rubber dam isolation in reducing atmospheric bacterial contamination. ASDC J Dent Child. 1989;56(6):442-444.

Liebenberg WH. Extending the use of rubber dam isolation: alternative procedures. Part I. Quintessence International. 1992;23(10):657-657-665.

Thorpe BL. History of Dental Surgery. Biographies of Pioneer American Dentists and Their Successors. Koch C, editor. Vol. 3. National Art Publishing Co.; 1910. 417 p.

Hitmi L, Attal JP, Degrange M. Influence of the time-point of salivary contamination on dentin shear bond strength of 3 dentin adhesive systems. J Adhes Dent. 1999;1(3):219-232.

Knight GT, Barghi N, Berry TG. Comparing two methods of moisture control in bonding to enamel: a clinical study. Oper Dent. 1991;16(4):130-135.

Stape THS, Tjäderhane L, Abuna G, Sinhoreti MAC, Martins LRM, Tezvergil-Mutluay A. Optimization of the etch-and-rinse technique: New perspectives to improve resin–dentin bonding and hybrid layer integrity by reducing residual water using dimethyl sulfoxide pretreatments. Dental Materials. 2018;34(7):967-977.

Choi A-N, Lee J-H, Son S-A, Jung K-H, Kwon YH, Park J-K. Effect of Dentin Wetness on the Bond Strength of Universal Adhesives. Materials (Basel). 2017;10(11).

Kapitán M, Sustova Z, Ivancakova R, Suchanek J. A comparison of different rubber dam systems on a dental simulator. Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2014;57(1):15-20.

Lawson NC, Gilbert GH, Funkhouser E, Eleazer PD, Benjamin PL, Worley DC. General Dentists’ Use of Isolation Techniques during Root Canal Treatment: From the National Dental Practice-based Research Network. J Endod. 2015;41(8):1219-1225.

Tanalp J, Kayataş M, Can EDB, Kayahan MB, Timur T. Evaluation of senior dental students’ general attitude towards the use of rubber dam: a survey among two dental schools. ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:290101.

Kapitán M, Sustová Z. The use of rubber dam among Czech dental practitioners. Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2011;54(4):144-148.

Unal GC, Kaya BU, Tac AG, Kececi AD. Survey of attitudes, materials and methods preferred in root canal therapy by general dental practice in Turkey: Part 1. Eur J Dent. 2012;6(4):376-384.

Raoof M, Zeini N, Haghani J, Sadr S, Mohammadalizadeh S. Preferred materials and methods employed for endodontic treatment by Iranian general practitioners. Iran Endod J. 2015;10(2):112-116.

Soldani F, Foley J. An assessment of rubber dam usage amongst specialists in paediatric dentistry practising within the UK. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2007;17(1):50-56.

Savani GM, Sabbah W, Sedgley CM, Whitten B. Current Trends in Endodontic Treatment by General Dental Practitioners: Report of a United States National Survey. J Endod. 2014;40(5):618-624.

Fernández R, Monsalve S, Vásquez J, Robayo J, Lacouture O, Álvarez G. Rubber dam use in endodontic treatment and restorative dentistry by general dentists in a South American Sub-population. Int J Endod Rehab. 2016;2(1):29-38.

Al-Omari WM. Survey of attitudes, materials and methods employed in endodontic treatment by general dental practitioners in North Jordan. BMC Oral Health [Internet]. 2004 [citado 28 de julio de 2016];4(1). Disponible en: http://bmcoralhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1472-6831-4-1

Mathias P, Rocha V, Saraiva L, Cavalcanti AN, Azevedo JF, Paulillo LAMS. Intraoral environment conditions and their influence on marginal leakage in composite resin restorations. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2010;23(2):105-110.

Jacquot B, Durand J-C, Farge P, Valcarcel J, Deville de Périère D, Cuisinier

F. Influence of temperature and relative humidity on dentin and enamel bonding: a critical review of the literature. Part 1. Laboratory studies. J Adhes Dent. 2012;14(5):433-446.

Lynch CD, McConnell RJ. Attitudes and use of rubber dam by Irish general dental practitioners. Int Endod J. 2007;40(6):427-432.

Feizbakhsh M, Aslani F, Gharizadeh N, Heidarizadeh M. Comparison of bracket bond strength to etched and unetched enamel under dry and wet conditions using Fuji Ortho LC glass-ionomer. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2017;11(1):30-35.

Whitworth JM, Seccombe GV, Shoker K, Steele JG. Use of rubber dam and irrigant selection in UK general dental practice: UK endodontic practice. Int Endod J. 2000;33(5):435-441.

Mala S, Lynch CD, Burke FM, Dummer PMH. Attitudes of final year dental students to the use of rubber dam. Int Endod J. 2009;42(7):632-638.

Zou H, Li Y, Lian X, Yan Y, Dai X, Wang G. Frequency and Influencing Factors of Rubber Dam Usage in Tianjin: A Questionnaire Survey. Int J Dent. 2016;2016:7383212.

Demarco FF, Baldissera RA, Madruga FC, Simões RC, Lund RG, Correa MB, et al. Anterior composite restorations in clinical practice: findings from a survey with general dental practitioners. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013;21(6):497-504.

Joynt RB, Davis EL, Schreier PH. Rubber dam usage among practicing dentists. Oper Dent. 1989;14(4):176-181.

Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28(3):215-235.

Barros de Campos PR, Maia RR, Rodrigues de Menezes L, Barbosa IF, Carneiro da Cunha A, da Silveira Pereira GD. Rubber dam isolation--key to success in diastema closure technique with direct composite resin. Int J Esthet Dent. 2015;10(4):564-574.

Feierabend SA, Matt J, Klaiber B. A comparison of conventional and new rubber dam systems in dental practice. Oper Dent. 2011;36(3):243-250.

Knight GT, Berry TG, Barghi N, Burns TR. Effects of two methods of moisture control on marginal microleakage between resin composite and etched enamel: a clinical study. Oper Dent. 1993;6(5):475-479.

Daudt E, Lopes G, Vieira L. Does Operatory Field Isolation Influence the Performance of Direct Adhesive Restorations? J Adhes Dent. 2013;(1):27–32.

Madison S, Wilcox LR. An evaluation of coronal microleakage in endodontically treated teeth. Part III. In vivo study. J Endod. 1988;14(9):455-458.

Gillen BM, Looney SW, Gu L-S, Loushine BA, Weller RN, Loushine RJ,

et al. Impact of the quality of coronal restoration versus the quality of root canal fillings on success of root canal treatment: a systematic review and

meta-analysis. J Endod. 2011;37(7):895-902.

Goldfein J, Speirs C, Finkelman M, Amato R. Rubber dam use during post placement influences the success of root canal-treated teeth. J Endod. 2013;39(12):1481-1484.

Smales RJ. Rubber dam usage related to restoration quality and survival. Br Dent J. 1993;174(9):330-333.

Van Dijken JW, Hörstedt P. Effect of the use of rubber dam versus cotton rolls on marginal adaptation of composite resin fillings to acid-etched enamel. Acta Odontol Scand. 1987;45(5):303-308.

Deprá MB, de Almeida JX, da Cunha T de MA, Lon LFS, Retamoso LB, Tanaka OM. Effect of saliva contamination on bond strength with a hydrophilic composite resin. Dental Press J Orthod. 2013;18(1):63-68.

Cunha T de MA da, Behrens BA, Nascimento D, Retamoso LB, Lon LFS, Tanaka O, et al. Blood contamination effect on shear bond strength of an orthodontic hydrophilic resin. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012;20(1):89-93.

Bassir L, Khanehmasjedi M, Nasr E, Kaviani A. An in vitro comparison of microleakage of two self-etched adhesive and the one-bottle adhesive used in pit and fissure sealant with or without saliva contamination. Indian J Dent Res. 2012;23(6):806.

Farmer SN, Ludlow SW, Donaldson ME, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A. Microleakage of composite and two types of glass ionomer restorations with saliva contamination at different steps. Pediatr Dent. 2014;36(1):14-17.




Licencia de Creative Commons
Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional.

 

 

CES Odontología/ ISSN 0120-971X Electrónico 2215-9185

Facultad de Odontología, Universidad CES.

Calle 10A No. 22 - 04, Medellín, Colombia

Publicada desde 1987.

revistaodontologia@ces.edu.co

 

http://www.ces.edu.co/