Comparison of different methods for evaluating resin composite restorations in posterior teeth

Abstract

Aim: To compare different methods for evaluating composite resin restorations in posterior teeth and to evaluate the reliability of each method by determining the intraobserver agreement. Material and methods: 136 class I resin composite restorations were evaluated by a trained examiner using modified Ryge criteria to assess selected restoration characteristics with three different methods: clinical, photographic and dental cast models. Results: The results showed that intraexaminer agreement was better on dental cast models evaluations for marginal integrity and anatomic form and was similar between photographic and clinical evaluations for marginal integrity and marginal discoloration. Surface texture showed the lowest degree of intraexaminer agreement with all the methods tested. Direct clinical method and the two indirect methods were significantly different for all the characteristics assessed (p<0.05). Photographs and dental cast models methods gave higher mean ranks than direct clinical method for marginal integrity and anatomic form. Photographs and dental cast models evaluations were similar for all the characteristics assessed, except for surface texture (p<0.05). Conclusion: All of the methods were different for all the characteristics assessed. The highest Intraexaminer agreement was obtained from dental cast models evaluation. All the methods showed that are not adequate to evaluate surface texture