Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34070253›Full record

ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Comparison of Fissure Sealant Chair Time and Patients' Preference Using Three Different Isolation Techniques.

Rahif E Mattar, Ayman M Sulimany, Saad S Binsaleh, Ibrahim M Al-Majed

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05749991 (A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Fissure Sealant Retention Rate, Chair Time, and Patients' Preference Using Dryshield and Cotton Roll Isolation), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05749991 nacompletednot on this map

A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Fissure Sealant Retention Rate, Chair Time, and Patients' Preference Using Dryshield and Cotton Roll Isolation

TypeinterventionalSponsorKuwait UniversityRan2018 to 2020Enrolled65ConditionsRetention, Time, Patient PreferenceArmsDryshield, Cotton roll isolation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Sealant retention, patient satisfaction, and operator preference: a split-mouth randomised controlled trial comparing EasyPrepEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rahif E MattarDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-3102-2857
Ayman M SulimanyDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-3861-1707
Saad S BinsalehDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia.
Ibrahim M Al-MajedDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia.
King Saud University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the patient's preference and chair time needed during pit and fissure sealant placement under three isolation techniques (Isolite system, rubber dam isolation, and cotton roll isolation). Participants, aged 6-15 years and requiring four sealants on the first or second permanent molars, attending the pediatric dental clinics at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria. Each participant received sealants on three random first or second permanent molars using three isolation techniques. The time required for sealant placement was recorded for each technique. Following sealant placement, an interview-based questionnaire was administered to the participants to evaluate their preference regarding the isolation techniques. Forty-eight children (23 male and 25 female) with a mean age of 8.58 ± 1.93 years participated in this study. The mean chair times were 248.14, 255.89, and 243.29 s for the Isolite system, rubber dam isolation, and cotton roll isolation, respectively. Approximately 79% of participants considered cotton roll isolation to be the most comfortable, whereas approximately 71% were significantly less likely to use rubber dam isolation again. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in sealant placement time among the three isolation techniques. However, cotton roll isolation was the technique that was most preferred by the participants.

Indexed as

childrenfissure sealantsisolationIsolitepatient preferencepermanent molarsrandomized clinical trialtime

Identifiers

PMID34070253
PMCPMC8225132
OpenAlexW3165287845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.