ArticleBDJ open2025
Introducing flowable resin composite as a novel palatal dressing after free gingival graft harvesting: a randomized clinical trial.
Article in BDJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of using a flowable resin composite compared to periodontal pack in reducing postoperative morbidity after free gingival graft (FGG) harvesting. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this randomized controlled clinical trial, 34 patients requiring FGG were allocated into two equal groups. The intervention group received a flowable resin composite dressing over the palatal wound, while the control group received Coe-Pak. Postoperative pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and mean analgesic consumption over 14 days. Secondary outcomes included wound size and color match of the healing site assessed at weeks 1, 2, 3, and 6.
resultsThe control group reported significantly higher VAS pain scores than the intervention group on days 1-4 and 10 (p < 0.05), and highly significant differences on days 5, 6, 8, and 9 (p < 0.001). Analgesic use decreased significantly in both groups (p < 0.001), with no intergroup differences. Wound size and color match improvements were comparable between groups.
conclusionThe application of flowable resin composite significantly reduces early postoperative pain following FGG harvesting without compromising healing outcomes. Its ease of application, patient comfort, and comparable clinical performance make it a promising alternative to traditional dressings. However, further investigations are warranted to confirm the biocompatibility of flowable resin composites and their impact on soft tissue healing.
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.