ArticleCureus2024
Comparative Analysis of Periodontal Parameters and Patient Satisfaction Utilising Different Temporary Crown Fabrication Techniques: A Parallel-Group Randomised Controlled Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shear Bond Strength of Silane-Containing Universal Adhesives in Repairing Aged 3D-Printed Provisional Restorations With Flowable Composite: An In Vitro Study.International journal of dentistry · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim The study aims to evaluate the efficacy of different techniques for temporary crown fabrication in maintaining periodontal health and patient satisfaction, addressing a critical gap in the existing literature and informing evidence-based clinical practices. Materials and methods This study, conducted in accordance with CONSORT guidelines, was a parallel-group randomised trial conducted at a dental institute in India. In total, 36 participants aged 18-65 requiring anterior tooth region crowns were randomly assigned to three groups: direct (control), indirect (Test Group 1) and direct-indirect (Test Group 2) fabrication techniques. Participants were selected from outpatient departments based on eligibility criteria, and interventions were allocated using randomization tables. Outcome assessments included gingival health metrics and patient satisfaction levels, with statistical analyses performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results Significant differences were observed in the pink esthetic score (PES) and patient satisfaction (P=0.029) among the three groups, with the direct-indirect technique group demonstrating the highest median PES (9 out of 10). However, no significant disparities were noted in the plaque index (PI) or probing depth (PD) among the groups. Conclusion The direct-indirect technique demonstrated superior PES and patient satisfaction, indicating potential benefits for periodontal health and patient experiences. Integration of virtual preparation workflows may optimise outcomes, but further research is needed for validation and guideline development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.