title: The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials A three-year follow-up of glass ionomer cement and resin fissure sealants. How Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival Analysis Caries-Preventive Effect of a One-Time Application of Composite Resin and Glass Ionomer Sealants after 5 Years A comparison of retention and the effect on caries of fissure sealing with a glass-ionomer and a resin-based sealant. Clinical and antibacterial effectiveness of three different sealant materials. Use of Pit-and-Fissure Sealants. A field trial of resin-based and glass-ionomer fissure sealants: Clinical and radiographic assessment of caries Influence of Fluoride-Releasing Restorative Material on Root Dentine Secondary Caries in situ Effectiveness of a glass ionomer cement used as a pit and fissure sealant in recently erupted permanent first molars. Evidence favoring the use of anticoagulants in the hospital phase of acute myocardial infarction. Comparison of glass-ionomer and resin-based fissure sealants: a 2-year clinical trial. Retention and caries preventive effects of a GIC and a resin-based fissure sealant. A comparative study of fluoride-releasing composite resin and glass ionomer materials used as fissure sealants. Effects of glass ionomer cement, resin-based pit and fissure sealant and HF applications on occlusal caries in a developing country field trial. Retention of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant and effect on carious outcome after 7 years. Fissure sealants: a 4-year clinical trial comparing an experimental glass polyalkenoate cement with a bis glycidyl methacrylate resin used as fissure sealants Retention of a resin-based sealant and a glass ionomer used as a fissure sealant: a comparative clinical study.
abstract: To comprehend the results of a r and omised controlled trial ( RCT ) , readers must underst and its design , conduct , analysis , and interpretation . That goal can be achieved only through total transparency from authors . Despite several decades of educational efforts , the reporting of RCTs needs improvement . Investigators and editors developed the original CONSORT ( Consoli date d St and ards of Reporting Trials ) statement to help authors improve reporting by use of a checklist and flow diagram . The revised CONSORT statement presented here incorporates new evidence and addresses some criticisms of the original statement . The checklist items pertain to the content of the Title , Abstract , Introduction , Methods , Results , and Discussion . The revised checklist includes 22 items selected because empirical evidence indicates that not reporting this information is associated with biased estimates of treatment effect , or because the information is essential to judge the reliability or relevance of the findings . We intended the flow diagram to depict the passage of participants through an RCT . The revised flow diagram depicts information from four stages of a trial ( enrolment , intervention allocation , follow- up , and analysis ) . The diagram explicitly shows the number of participants , for each intervention group , included in the primary data analysis . Inclusion of these numbers allows the reader to judge whether the authors have done an intention- to-treat analysis . In sum , the CONSORT statement is intended to improve the reporting of an RCT , enabling readers to underst and a trial 's conduct and to assess the validity of its results The aim of the present study was to compare intraindividually a type III fissure-sealant , glass ionomer cement with a resin-based sealant .  One hundred and forty-eight first permanent molars were sealed in forty-seven children . After three years 20.8 percent of the resin and 34.7 percent of the glass ionomer cement sealants were partially lost , and 0 percent and 37.5 percent , respectively , were totally lost . One tooth ( 1.4 percent ) in the glass ionomer cement group and three teeth ( 4.2 percent ) in the resin group developed caries Context Clinicians rely on systematic review s for current , evidence -based information . Contribution This survival analysis of 100 meta-analyses indexed in ACP Journal Club from 1995 to 2005 found that new evidence that substantively changed conclusions about the effectiveness or harms of therapies arose frequently and within relatively short time periods . The median survival time without substantive new evidence for the meta-analyses was 5.5 years . Significant new evidence was already available for 7 % of the review s at the time of publication and became available for 23 % within 2 years . Implication Clinical ly important evidence that alters conclusions about the effectiveness and harms of treatments can accumulate rapidly . The Editors Systematic review s have become increasingly common in recent years ( 1 ) and are recommended by many as the best sources of evidence to guide both clinical decisions ( 2 ) and health care policy ( 3 ) . For systematic review s to fulfill these roles , their findings must remain relatively stable for at least several years or effective mechanisms must exist for alerting end users to important changes in evidence . Yet , surprisingly little research has assessed the extent to which systematic review s become out of date or the rate at which this occurs ( 47 ) . Some organizations , such as the Cochrane Collaboration , recommend updating systematic review s every 2 years , but few empirical data guide this or other recommendations about updating . We sought to determine how quickly systematic review s meet explicitly defined criteria for changes in evidence of sufficient importance to warrant updating . We also sought to identify predictors of survival time , the time to such important changes in evidence . Survival time might vary depending on many factors , including the type of question posed by the original review ( for example , therapeutic or diagnostic ) , the types of studies included ( for example , r and omized trials or observational studies ) , and whether the systematic review provided quantitative synthesis . To limit such variation , we focused on systematic review s of r and omized , controlled trials that evaluated therapeutic benefit or harm by providing quantitative synthesis ( meta- analysis ) for at least 1 outcome . Methods Study Design and Sample We used a quasi-r and om process ( alphabetical sort order by author ) to select 100 systematic review s that were indexed in ACP Journal Club with an accompanying commentary between January 1995 and December 2005 ( with a search date no later than 31 December 2004 to ensure at least 1 full year for new evidence to appear ) . We chose this sampling frame because ACP Journal Club selects systematic review s that meet explicit quality st and ards and are deemed directly relevant to clinical practice ( 8) . We regarded the sample size of 100 as sufficiently large to achieve suitably narrow confidence intervals and to permit evaluation of up to 5 potential predictors of survival . Eligibility Criteria Eligible review s evaluated the benefit or harm of a specific drug , class of drug , device , or procedure ( invasive procedure or surgery ) and included r and omized or quasi-r and omized , controlled trials . We excluded evaluations of alternative and complementary medicines because the stability of review s of such therapies might differ substantially from review s of conventional therapies . We required that review s provide a point estimate and 95 % confidence interval for at least 1 outcome in the form of a relative risk , odds ratio , or absolute risk difference for binary outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes . We excluded meta-analyses of individual-patient data , meta-regressions , and indirect meta-analyses because of the difficulty of determining whether new data would alter previous quantitative results . Two team members independently assessed eligibility , with disagreements resolved by consensus involving a third review er . When more than 1 review on the same topic was identified , only the earliest was included . Search ing For each review , search es for new trials included identifying new systematic review s on the same topic , su bmi tting relevant content terms to the Clinical Queries function in Ovid , applying the Related Articles function in PubMed to the 3 largest and the 3 most recent trials in the original review ( up to 6 trials in total ) , and using Scopus ( www . scopus .com/ scopus /home.url ) to identify new r and omized trials that cited the original review . When these search strategies yielded no eligible new trials , we conducted more comprehensive electronic search es and review ed relevant chapters in such sources as Clinical Evidence and UpTo Date to ensure that we had not missed new trials . Team members who had background s in both medicine and clinical research screened citations retrieved by the preceding methods to identify trials that would have met the inclusion criteria in the original review . Retrieved articles were screened in chronological order to ascertain quantitative or qualitative signals for the need for updating . The review protocol stopped when any criteria for updating were met . Each systematic review was discussed in detail , with the final statussignal for updating was or was not detectedadjudicated by consensus ( Figure 1 ) . Figure 1 . Overall process for determining updating status . ACP Journal Club Signals for the Need to Up date Systematic Review s In design ing criteria for comparing new findings with those in a previous review , we adapted methods used by other investigators to address similar problems with comparing 2 sets of results relating to the same question ( 913 ) , such as r and omized and nonr and omized studies of the same intervention . These investigators identified conflicting findings among different publications using a combination of quantitative thresholds for differences in effect magnitude and qualitative judgments about the language used to describe the results . We have similarly conceptualized quantitative and qualitative signals of potential changes in evidence that are sufficiently important to warrant updating previous systematic review s. Quantitative Signals Quantitative signals consisted of a change in statistical significance or relative change in effect magnitude of at least 50 % . We restricted these changes to those involving 1 of the primary outcomes of the original review or any mortality outcome . We also ignored trivial changes in statistical significance when the original and up date d meta-analytic results both had P values between 0.04 and 0.06so that quantitative signals of changes in evidence would represent robust indicators of the need to up date previous review s. Quantitative signals were detected by combining data from eligible new trials with the previous results using a fixed-effects approach . Use of fixed-effect models allowed pooling of the new trials with the previous meta-analytic result , as opposed to having to obtain original data from all of the included trials in each of 100 systematic review s. Although r and om-effects models are usually preferred to avoid spurious precision in the face of heterogeneity , our goal was to detect potential changes in evidence that would warrant a formal up date , not produce exact estimates of the up date d results . Qualitative Signals Qualitative signals included new information about harm sufficient to affect clinical decision making , important caveats to the original results , emergence of a superior alternate therapy , and important changes in certainty or direction of effect . Qualitative signals were detected by using explicit criteria for comparing the language in the original review with descriptions of findings in new systematic review s that addressed the same topic , pivotal trials , clinical practice guidelines , or recent editions of major textbooks ( for example , UpTo Date ) . Pivotal trials were defined as trials that had a sample size at least 3 times larger than that of the previous largest trial or were published in 1 of the 5 highest-impact general medical journals ( The New Engl and Journal of Medicine , Lancet , Journal of the American Medical Association , Annals of Internal Medicine , and the British Medical Journal ) . We defined 2 levels of importance for qualitative signals : potentially invalidating changes in evidence , which would make one no longer want clinicians or policymakers to base decisions on the original findings ( such as a pivotal trial that characterized treatment effectiveness in terms opposite of those in the original systematic review ) , and major changes in evidence , which would affect clinical decision making in important ways without invalidating the previous results ( such as the identification of patient population s for whom treatment is more or less beneficial ) . Major changes also included differing characterizations of effectiveness that were less extreme than those for potentially invalidating signals but that would still affect clinical decision making ( for example , a change from possibly beneficial to definitely beneficial ) . Of importance , such characterizations as possibly effective , probably effective , and promising , were all categorized as possibly effective . Thus , qualitative signals for changes in evidence captured substantive differences in the characterization of treatment effects , not merely semantic differences . Full definitions for each of the specific signals can be found at www.ohri.ca/UpdatingSystRevs . Data Collection For each review , we characterized the clinical content area , eligibility criteria for included trials , definitions of reported outcomes , number of included trials and participants , meta-analytic result for each outcome , identification of statistical heterogeneity , and excerpted quotations of the authors ' characterizations of the main results . We also abstract ed whether a given outcome was explicitly identified as 1 of the primary or main outcomes . We discounted identification of more than 3 such outcomes as inconsistent with the The aim of the present trial was to ( 1 ) compare the caries-preventive effect of glass ionomer sealants , placed according to the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) procedure , with composite resin sealants over time and ( 2 ) investigate the caries-preventive effect after complete disappearance of sealant material . Forty-six boys and 57 girls , mean age 7.8 years , were r and omly divided into two treatment groups in a parallel-group study design . A light-polymerized composite resin sealant material and a high-viscosity glass ionomer were each placed in 180 fully erupted first molars in their respective treatment groups . Evaluation took place annually for 5 years by calibrated examiners . After 5 years , 86 % composite resin and 88 % glass ionomer sealants did not survive . Three categories of re-exposure periods for caries development in pits and fissures after complete loss of sealants were distinguished : 0–1 , 1–2 and 2–3 years . In the 2- to 3-year group , 13 and 3 % of pits and fissures previously sealed with composite resin and glass ionomer , respectively , were diagnosed as having developed a dentine lesion . The relative risks ( 95 % CI ) of dentine lesion development in surfaces sealed with glass ionomer compared to those sealed with composite resin after 3 , 4 and 5 years were 0.22 ( 0.06–0.82 ) , 0.32 ( 0.14–0.73 ) and 0.28 ( 0.13–0.61 ) , respectively . The relative risks of dentine lesion development in pits and fissures previously sealed with glass ionomer compared with composite resin over re-exposure periods of 1–2 and 2–3 years were 0.26 ( 0.14–0.48 ) and 0.25 ( 0.09–0.68 ) , respectively . We conclude that the caries-preventive effect of high-viscosity glass ionomer sealants , placed using the ART procedure , was between 3.1 and 4.5 times higher than that of composite resin sealants after 3–5 years . Furthermore , high-viscosity ( ART ) glass ionomer sealants appear to have a four times higher chance of preventing caries development in re-exposed pits and fissures of occlusal surfaces in first molars than light-cured composite resin sealant material over a 1- to 3-year period . A well- design ed clinical trial using different types of oral health personnel should be implemented to confirm these initial results OBJECTIVE To compare the retention and the caries preventive effect of a glass-ionomer developed for fissure sealing ( Fuji III ) and a chemically polymerized resin-based fissure sealant ( Delton ) . DESIGN A split mouth r and omized design using contralateral teeth . SETTING WHO Regional Demonstration , Training and Research Center for Oral Health , Damascus , Syrian Arab Republic . SAMPLE AND METHODS 179 children , 7 years old at the start of the study , were recruited from schools close to the Center . Only children with at least one pair of permanent first molars that were caries free or only had incipient lesions were included in the study . Follow-up examinations for sealant retention were done after 6 months , 1 year , 2 years and 3 years . The number of children available for reexamination was 129 ( after 6 months ) ; 121 ( after 1 year ) ; 115 ( after 2 years ) and 116 ( after 3 years ) . Four dental hygienists were trained in the sealant procedures and did approximately one fourth of the sealants each . RESULTS After 3 years the  glass-ionomer sealant was completely lost in almost 90 % of the teeth compared to less than 10 % of the resin sealed teeth . After 3 years the relative risk of a tooth sealed with glass-ionomer over that of a tooth sealed with resin was 3.38 ( 95 % CL : 1.98 ; 5.79 ) . This finding was consistent over type of tooth . CONCLUSIONS The glass-ionomer sealant tested in the present study had poorer retention and less caries protective effect than the resin-based sealant used PURPOSE The aim of this work is to study and compare the retention rate , caries-preventing and antibacterial effects of resin-modified glass ionomer and flowable composite in comparison to conventional fissure sealant . METHODS Forty-five children aged 7 - 10 years with newly erupted lower first permanent molars were r and omly divided into three equal treatment groups . Group I : sealed by a conventional resin sealant ; Group II : sealed by resin modified glass ionomer ( RMGI ) ; and Group III : sealed by flowable composite .  Retention and caries status of the sealed teeth were recorded after 1 month , 6 months , year and 2 years . In addition , Streptococcus mutans counts were assessed at baseline , 1 day , 1 month , 6 months , 1 year and 2 years after sealant application . Data were analyzed by Fisher exact , chi-square and ANOVA tests . RESULTS Group III and Group I showed significantly higher retention rates than Group II fissure sealant ( p<0.05 ) . There were no differences of the caries-preventive effects between the tested sealant material s throughout the duration of the study . Streptococcus mutans counts were significantly lower in group II compared to group I or group III up to 6 months of the study ( p<0.05 ) . After 1 year of the study the differences of Streptococcus mutans counts were not significant ( p>0.05 ) . CONCLUSION This study indicated a lower retention of RMGI compared to flowable composite and resin sealant without significant difference in caries prevention or long-term bacterial inhibition BACKGROUND This article presents evidence -based clinical recommendations for the use of pit- and -fissure sealants on the occlusal surfaces of primary and permanent molars in children and adolescents . A guideline panel convened by the American Dental Association ( ADA ) Council on Scientific Affairs and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry conducted a systematic review and formulated recommendations to address clinical questions in relation to the efficacy , retention , and potential side effects of sealants to prevent dental caries ; their efficacy compared with fluoride varnishes ; and a head-to-head comparison of the different types of sealant material used to prevent caries on pits- and -fissures of occlusal surfaces . TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEW ED This is an up date of the ADA 2008 recommendations on the use of pit- and -fissure sealants on the occlusal surfaces of primary and permanent molars . The authors conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE , Embase , Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials , and other sources to identify r and omized controlled trials reporting on the effect of sealants ( available on the U.S. market ) when applied to the occlusal surfaces of primary and permanent molars . The authors used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment , Development , and Evaluation approach to assess the quality of the evidence and to move from the evidence to the decisions . RESULTS The guideline panel formulated 3 main recommendations . They concluded that sealants are effective in preventing and arresting pit- and -fissure occlusal carious lesions of primary and permanent molars in children and adolescents compared with the nonuse of sealants or use of fluoride varnishes . They also concluded that sealants could minimize the progression of non-cavitated occlusal carious lesions ( also referred to as initial lesions ) that receive a sealant . Finally , based on the available limited evidence , the panel was unable to provide specific recommendations on the relative merits of 1 type of sealant material over the others . Conclusions and practical implication s : These recommendations are design ed to inform practitioners during the clinical decision-making process in relation to the prevention of occlusal carious lesions in children and adolescents . Clinicians are encouraged to discuss the information in this guideline with patients or the parents of patients . The authors recommend that clinicians re-orient their efforts toward increasing the use of sealants on the occlusal surfaces of primary and permanent molars in children and adolescents OBJECTIVE The purpose of the present study was to provide further data for comparison of retention and caries-preventive effect of a resin-based sealant ( Delton , and a glass-ionomer sealant ( Fuji III ) . METHODS The study was conducted in the municipality of Vaerløse located 15 km north of Copenhagen , Denmark in the period 1996 - 2001 . The study comprised 153 children aged 8 - 13 years with a total of 364 site-pairs . Caries was diagnosed both clinical ly and radiographically , and sealant retention was diagnosed clinical ly . Sealants were placed either by one of four dentists , who had the responsibility for the children 's dental care , by a dental hygienist or a dental assistant . Mean follow-up time was 38 - 39 months for sites on first permanent molars and 28 - 29 months for sites on second permanent molars . RESULTS The retention rates were consistently , and considerably lower for Fuji III than for Delton .  Relative risks of caries in Delton-sealed teeth over Fuji III-sealed teeth was 0.435 ( 95 % CI 0.150 - 0.846 ) based on the clinical diagnosis , and 0.559 ( 95 % CI 0.342 - 0.905 ) based on the radiographic diagnosis . The ratio of the relative risks ( clinical over radiographic diagnosis ) was close to 1 ( 0.778 ; 95 % CI 0.272 - 1.481 ) . CONCLUSION In the present study , Delton-sealed teeth had a lower risk than Fuji III-sealed teeth of developing caries , independent of the caries diagnostic method used The usefulness of fluoride-releasing restorations in  secondary caries prevention may be question ed because of the presence of other common sources of fluoride and because of ageing of the restorations . This study tested the hypothesis that glass-ionomer cement restorations , either aged or unaged , do not prevent secondary root caries , when fluoride dentifrice is frequently used . Sixteen volunteers wore palatal appliances in two phases of 14 days , according to a 2 × 2 crossover design . In each phase the appliance was loaded with bovine root dentine slabs restored with either glass-ionomer or resin composite , either aged or unaged . Specimens were exposed to cariogenic challenge 4 times/day and to fluori date d dentifrice 3 times/day . The fluoride content in the biofilm ( FB ) formed on slabs and the mineral loss ( ΔZ ) around the restorations were analysed . No differences were found between restorative material s regarding the FB and the ΔZ , for either aged ( p = 0.792 and p = 0.645 , respectively ) or unaged ( p = 1.00 and p = 0.278 , respectively ) groups . Under the cariogenic and fluoride dentifrice exposure conditions of this study , the glass-ionomer restoration , either aged or unaged , did not provide additional protection against secondary root caries PURPOSE This study 's purpose was to evaluate the caries-preventive effect of a glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) used as an occlusal sealant on recently erupted permanent first molars . METHODS A double-blind , r and omized , controlled , clinical trial was undertaken that included 36 5- to 8-year-olds ( and 92 permanent first molars ) who were r and omly allocated to the test group ( GIC ) or the control group ( auto-polymerized resin-based sealant [ RBS ] )  . The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the number of new carious or filled occlusal surfaces in the 2 groups . RESULTS After 6 months , 1 occlusal surface in the test group and 2 occlusal surfaces in the control group showed carious lesions ( P=.15 ) . In the fifth year of follow-up , 2 occlusal surfaces in the test group and 7 occlusal surfaces in the control group were filled or carious ( P=.42 ) , and the mean number of sealed surfaces that became carious or filled was 0.2 ( 95 % confidence interval [CI]=0.02 - 0.70 ) for the GIC-sealed teeth and 0.6 ( 95 % CI=0.20 - 1.30 ) for the RBS-sealed teeth ( P=.30 ) . CONCLUSION High-viscosity glass ionomer cement can provide some level of protection against dental caries when used as a dental sealant in newly erupted permanent first molars Since the last comprehensive review of anticoagulation in acute myocardial infa rct ion four additional r and omized control trials have been reported . The overwhelming majority of all trials favored anticoagulation .  Rates of thromboembolism were higher in the control , and hemorrhagic complications in the anticoagulated group . Pooling of all r and omized control trials gives mean case fatality rates of 19.6 % for the control and 15.4 % for the anticoagulated group , a relative reduction of 21 % ( P less than 0.05 or less than 0.001 , depending on the analytic method ) . Five of six r and omized control trials reported " no effect " because the difference favoring anticoagulation was not statistically significant . However , sample sizes in these " negative " papers were too small to protect against missing a 21 % reduction in true case fatality rate due to anticoagulation ( beta greater than 0.10 ) . All patients who present no specific contraindication should receive  anticoagulants  during hospitalization for infa rct ion In recent years , the interest in the use of glass-ionomer material s as fissure sealants has increased . The aim of this study was to compare the retention and caries-preventive effect of glass-ionomer ( Fuji III ) and resin-based light-cured ( Delton ) fissure sealants .  Three health center dentists applied the sealants to 166 children ; glass-ionomer sealants  on one side and resin-based sealants on the contralateral side of the mouth . After 2 yr , one pair of molar teeth in the mouths of 151 children was compared . Twenty-six percent of glass-ionomer and 82 % of resin-based sealants were totally present ( P < 0.001 ) . During the 2 yr , in both groups 4.6 % of the sealed surfaces became carious . The results show that the retention of glass-ionomer sealants  is markedly inferior to the resin-based sealants . In this study , however , no difference in caries increment on the sealed surfaces was observed . This may be due to the different mechanism of caries prevention for the sealant material s , or to the overall low caries activity of the participants Abstract Fissure sealing using partially filled resins is an established caries preventive practice . Glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) sealants may offer additional advantages due to their ability to bond chemically to enamel and release fluoride . The aim of this study was to compare the caries preventive effect and retention of a GIC and a resin-based sealant . Ketac-fil ® was tested against a chemically cured resin-based material ( Delton ® ) using a split mouth design . Perth ( Western Australia ) schoolchildren ( n= 465 ) , mean age 7 yr±0.72 ( S.D. ) , received sealants  on the occlusal surfaces of sound homologous permanent first molar pairs .  Test ( GIC ) and control ( resin ) sealants were systematic ally allocated to left and right sides based on the child 's month of birth , and were placed by dental therapists . After 3.64±0.11 yr , 415 children were examined by different clinicians , and the clinical status of the teeth and the extent of sealant retention recorded . Sealants were deemed retained when at least 2/3 of the fissure pattern was still sealed . In 252 tooth pairs , neither sealant was retained to this extent . In 71 pairs , the GIC was not retained and the resin sealant retained . In 40 pairs the reverse occurred ( McNemar 's test , χ2= 8.66 , P < 0.005 ) . Net gain ( additional lesions prevented by the test agent per 100 treatments ) was 6.1%(95 % CI 3.3 % , 8.9 % ) . Effectiveness of the GIC was 80.6 % ( 95 % CI 59.6 % , 90.7 % ) . The relative risk of caries in test teeth was 0.19 ( 95 % CI 0.09 , 0.40 ) . The study suggests that complete retention of GIC sealant is not necessary for caries prevention in newly erupted permanent first molars OBJECTIVES The objectives of the study were to investigate the clinical use of two fluoride-releasing fissure sealants and to study fluoride release under laboratory conditions . METHODS In the clinical part of the study the two material s , FluroShield and Baseline , were applied to matched contralateral caries-free first permanent molars in 86 children aged 7 - 8 years . In the laboratory study fluoride release from each material was measured using a model cavity system . RESULTS After 3 years FluroShield was intact on 70 % of teeth . Retention was significantly better on lower molars than upper molars . Baseline was lost from all except two teeth within 6 months . After 3 years , caries had affected four teeth sealed with FluroShield and 24 teeth sealed with Baseline ; this difference was highly significant . The laboratory study showed that FluroShield released twice as much fluoride over 9 days than did Baseline . Long term studies using FluroShield showed a small steady fluoride release over 6 months . CONCLUSIONS The conclusion of the study was that FluroShield was a much more effective fissure sealant than Baseline . The clinical performance of FluroShield was comparable to that of other inert composite resin sealants and superior to that of fluoride-releasing sealants used previously The aim of this community-oriented study was to evaluate different methods to prevent fissure caries . The following products and measures were tested : 1 ) glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) applied by dentist ; 2 ) same material applied by short term ( 3 days ) trained personnel ( teachers ) ; 3 ) application of a 0.5 % HF solution three times ; 4 ) an established autopolymerized resin based sealant ( Delton ) . The study was performed in Bangkok , Thail and , a city in a developing country experiencing increasing caries prevalence . Children with at least three sound permanent molars from two age groups , 7 - 8 and 12 - 13-yr-olds respectively were chosen from very low to medium socioeconomic level families . 1264 children were systematic ally assigned to experiment or control groups based on school and DMFT . For the younger age group , the 2 yr mean DFS occlusal increment in the Control group was 0.66 surfaces . Significantly lower increments were observed in the GIC experimental group : 0.17 surfaces applied by the teachers and 0.32 applied by dentist , corresponding to 74 % and 52 % reductions , respectively . The mean increment in the HF group was 0.44 surfaces , a 33 % reduction in relation to the Control group . For the 12 - 13-yr-olds , the mean occlusal surface DF increment was 0.70 surfaces in the Control group . Almost no occlusal increment was found in the Delton group , 0.05 DFS , a 93 % reduction . In the GIC Dentist group , the DFS increment was 0.48 and in the Teacher group 0.56 , corresponding to 31 % and 20 % reduction , respectively . A slight and nonsignificant increase of caries in relation to the Control group was observed in the HF group . ( ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS The aim of this study was to compare the retention and caries preventive efficacy of glass ionomer ( Fuji III ; GIC ) and light-cured resin-based ( Delton ; LCR ) fissure sealants .  One hundred and sixty-six 5 - 14-year-old schoolchildren received sealants on their newly erupted first or second molars ; a split mouth design was used . Previously reported 2-year results showed low retention rates for GIC sealants , but no difference in the caries increment between the groups . The same persons were invited to a dental check-up 6.1 to 7.8 ( mean 7.1 ) years after the application of sealants ;  111 persons ( 66.8 % of the original group ) participated in the study . The retention of sealants , and the caries status of occlusal surfaces and adjacent proximal surfaces was recorded . On the sealed occlusal surfaces , 10 % of GIC and 45 % of LCR sealants were totally and 9 % of GIC and 20 % of LCR sealants partially present . Twenty-three ( 23.5 % ) of the occlusal surfaces sealed with GIC and 16 ( 16.5 % ) of those sealed with LCR were carious or filled . Compared to LCR sealants , the effectiveness of GIC sealants  was -44 % ( 95 % CI -71 % , -16 % ) and net gain -7 % ( 95 % CI -18 % , 4 % ) . The relative risk of caries occurring was 1.44 ( 95 % CI 0.96 , 2.14 ) The 4-year results of a fissure sealant trial are reported . Glass polyalkenoate and bis GMA sealant were applied to 590 first permanent molar teeth using a half mouth study design in a group of 228 6 - 8-year-old children . Similar cariostasis was observed for the two material s at the end of 4 years despite marked differences in retention . Polyalkenoate cements probably should be regarded as ' fluoride depot ' material s rather than fissure sealants when used in this Sealing occlusal pits and fissures with resin-based sealants is a proven method of preventing occlusal caries . Retention of the sealant is very essential for its efficiency . This study evaluated the retention of glass ionomer used as a fissure sealant when compared to a self-cure resin-based sealant .  One hundred and seven children between the ages of 6 - 9 years , with all four newly erupted permanent first molars were selected . Two permanent first molars on one side of the mouth were sealed with Delton , a resin-based sealant , and the contralateral two permanent first molars were sealed with Fuji VII glass ionomer cement .  Evaluation of sealant retention was performed at regular intervals over 12 months , using Simonsen 's criteria . At the end of the study period , the retention of the resin sealant  was seen to be superior to that of the glass ionomer sealant
target: The overall outcome of the computed data sets suggest no difference between the caries-preventive effects of GIC- and resin-based fissure sealants .
background: Background This article constitutes a partial up date of the original systematic review evidence by Yengopal et al. from 15 January 2008 ( published in the Journal of Oral Science in 2009 ) with primary focus on research quality in regard to bias risk in trials .
  Its aim is to up date the existing systematic review evidence from the English literature as to whether caries occurrence on pits and fissures of teeth sealed with either GIC or resin is the same .