title: [Clinical evaluation of two temporary restoration materials: Composite and self-cured acrylic resin].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical application and effect of two temporary restorations materials: composite and self-cured acrylic resin.
  
  
  METHODS
  153 composite temporary crowns (and bridges) placed in 44 patients and 144 self-cured acrylic resin temporary crowns (and bridges) placed in 49 patients were evaluated according to the California Dental Association's (CDA) criteria and questionnaire.
  
  
  RESULTS
  It showed that composite temporary crowns (and bridges) had better surface smoothness, marginal integrity and anatomic form than self-cured acrylic resin temporary crowns (and bridges). In the 49 patients with self-cured acrylic resin temporary crowns (and bridges), 67% and 88% of them complained of food impaction and mouth odor, while only 2% and 30% in the 44 patients with composite temporary crowns (and bridges) had the same complaint.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Between the two temporary restoration materials, composite is better than self-cured acrylic resin.
authors.affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, West China College of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
authors.forename: Yun
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Luo
authors.forename: Weixin
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Zheng
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Yang
mesh_terms: D000180:Acrylic Resins; D003188:Composite Resins; D003442:Crowns; D001840:Dental Bonding; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D003794:Dental Restoration, Temporary / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
chemical_list: D000180:Acrylic Resins; D003188:Composite Resins