27 April 2023 : Clinical Research
A Clinical Study of 50 Partially Edentulous Patients with Fixed Partial Denture Restorations to Compare Clinical Parameters and Changes in Gingival Sulcus Width After Displacement with 2 Different Gingival Retraction Cord Materials (Cotton and Polymer)
Lakshya Kumar12ABEF*, Khurshid A. Mattoo



DOI: 10.12659/MSM.940098
Med Sci Monit 2023; 29:e940098
Table 3 Differences in gingival retraction measurements of studied groups (within groups [baseline to post-retraction] and between groups [post-retraction]).
N (number) | Group | Mean±SD | Mean differences (CI 95%) | ‘t’ value | Significance | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gp C | 30 | Baseline | 162.27±11.32 | 309.11±21.16 | 681.885 | 0.00001 |
30 | Post retraction | 471.38±28.13 | ||||
Gp P | 30 | Baseline | 164.19±11.07 | 525.84±38.32 | 623.967 | 0.00001 |
30 | Post retraction | 690.03±45.37 | ||||
Group C | 30 | Post retraction | 471.38±28.13 | N.A | 375.770 | 0.0001 |
Group P | 30 | Post retraction | 690.03±45.37 | |||
GP – group; C – cotton; P – polymer; All measurements are in micrometers (μm). Differences in mean and their standard deviations: using formula z = [(x1 − x2) − (μ1 − μ2)]/sqrt (σ12/n1 + σ22/n2). [] Dependant t test; [] Independant t test. Levels of significance: NS (Not-Significant)=P≥0.05; Significant=P |