Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 18, 2026
Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
Chemomechanical caries removal method versus mechanical caries removal methods in clinical and community-based
K V K Santosh Kumar1, M Ghanashyam Prasad1, R Venkata Sandeep1
1Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, St. Joseph Dental College and Hospital, Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Objective:
To compare the effectiveness of various caries removal techniques in mandibular primary molars using Smart Burs, atraumatic restorative technique (ART) (mechanical caries removal) and Carie-care (chemomechanical caries removal [CMCR]) among primary school children in clinical and community-based settings.
Materials And Methods:
A total of 80 carious primary mandibular molars were selected for the study from the dental clinic and community. They were equally assigned to four groups according to caries removal technique and also by the operating site. In Group 1, caries was removed using Carie-care in the dental clinic and in Group 2, with Smart Burs in the dental clinic. In Group 3, caries was removed using Carie-care in the field and in Group 4, with the ART in the field. The time taken for caries removal, the efficacy of caries removal and patient acceptance were evaluated with different caries removal techniques.
Statistical Analysis:
The obtained data were subjected to statistical analysis by ANOVA test.
Results:
In clinical settings, Carie-care was time-consuming but was more efficient with increased acceptance than Smart Burs and the result was found to be significant statistically (P < 0.05). In community-based settings, Carie-care was more efficient, less time consuming, and showed an increased acceptance when compared to atraumatic restorative treatment and the result was found to be significant statistically (P < 0.05).
Conclusions:
The CMCR technique was superior to the mechanical caries removal technique in primary teeth among school children in terms of time, efficacy, and acceptance in both clinical- and community-based settings.
