Get access

Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent or adult posterior teeth

  • Protocol
  • Intervention

Authors


Abstract

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows:

To examine the effectiveness of direct composite resin restorations (fillings) compared to amalgam fillings for permanent posterior teeth.

Primary null hypothesis: there is no difference between amalgam and resin composite in the longevity of restorations (proportion lasting 3 years or more).

Secondary null hypothesis: there is no difference between amalgam and resin composite in the aspect of resources use and adverse events.

Tertiary null hypothesis: there is no difference between amalgam and resin composite in failure rates for the following failure reasons: secondary caries, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, pulpal sensitivity, patient satisfaction.

Get access to the full text of this article