Year: 2026 | Month: April-June | Volume: 10 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 33-37
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/gijash.20260205
Comparative Clinical Evaluation of Smart Monochromatic Composite and Traditional Multi-Shade Composite in Primary Teeth Restorations: A Randomized Clinical Study
Sridhar M1, Himasree Kanneganti2, Naseemoon Shaik3, Sravanthi. J4, Snehika G5, Pravallika Bheema6, Divya Madhuri7
1Professor & Head of the Department, Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry MNR Dental College, Sangareddy, Telangana.
2,6,7Postgradute student, Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry MNR Dental College, Sangareddy, Telangana.
3,4Associate Professor, Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry MNR Dental College, Sangareddy, Telangana.
5Senior Lecturer, Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry MNR Dental College, Sangareddy, Telangana.
Corresponding Author: Dr. Naseemoon Shaik
ABSTRACT
Background: Dental esthetics in children significantly influences oral function, psychological well-being, and social acceptance. Pediatric restorative procedures often face challenges related to behavior management and treatment duration. While traditional multi-shade composites offer excellent esthetics, they require precise shade matching, increasing chairside time. Smart monochromatic composites have been introduced to overcome these limitations through color-adaptive filler technology.
Aim and Objectives: This study aimed to compare smart monochromatic composites and traditional composites in terms of treatment duration, patient acceptance, and short-term color stability in primary anterior tooth restorations.
Methods: A randomized clinical trial was conducted among 40 systemically healthy children (4–9 years). Teeth were randomly assigned to:Group 1: Traditional multi-shade composite (n=20). Group 2: Smart monochromatic composite (n=20).
Standard etch-and-bond protocols were followed. Treatment duration was recorded, patient acceptance was assessed using Likert scale, and color stability was evaluated at baseline, 7, 15, and 30 days using Vita Lumin color scale. Statistical analysis was performed with Student’s t-test, with p<0.05 considered significant.
Results: Smart monochromatic composites significantly reduced treatment time (8.11 ± 0.72 min vs. 10.36 ± 0.84 min, p=0.03) and yielded higher patient acceptance (4.6 ± 0.51 vs. 4.0 ± 0.00, p=0.001). Color stability was superior at all follow-up intervals (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Smart monochromatic composites offer enhanced clinical efficiency, better patient cooperation, and improved esthetic stability in pediatric anterior restorations. Their simplified application protocol makes them particularly valuable for child patients with limited attention spans. Longer-term studies are recommended to confirm durability and performance in posterior and multi-surface restorations.
Keywords: Color stability, multi-shade composite, Pediatric dentistry, Smart monochromatic composite, Restorative materials.
[PDF Full Text]