Assessment of Clinical Efficacy and Patient Comfort Using Three Different Matrix Systems for Restoring Two Surface Lesions in Primary Molars: An in Vivo Study

Abstract

Background: Restorations on posterior teeth can have a number of issues, including incorrect contact points and proximal overhangs. With the recognition of significance of restoring tooth's right contour and contact, and repair of all tooth surfaces, including proximal walls, different matrix systems were introduced.
Aim: Assessing three different matrix systems in terms of their ability to create ideal contacts and contours along with patient comfort.
Material and Methodology: After taking approval from the college ethical committee and parent’s consent, a total of 120 patients, aged 4-8 years were treated based on selection criteria after randomly dividing them into 3 groups by computer randomization method. Group 1 used Tofflemire system, Group 2 used Unimatrix R sectional system, and Group 3 used FenderMate system for restoring proximal contacts of two surface lesions in primary molars. Time taken for placement of the system along with proximal contacts, proximal overhangs and patient comfort were assessed at the end of the procedure and a chi-square test was used for statistical analysis.
Results: Maximum optimal contacts were seen with Unimatrix R system and overhangs were absent for Tofflemire system. Also, there were no significant differences regarding the patient comfort among the three groups. The FenderMate system took the least time for application followed by Unimatrix R and Tofflemire system.

Conclusion: Sectional matrices were favoured for optimal contacts, circumferential matrices were determined to be more superior in terms of preference and one piece sectional matrix system showed time efficiency.