This review aims to summarize and analyze previous studies that evaluated the clinical efficiency, patient satisfaction, and future preference of Isolite System Isolation (ISI) and DryShield System Isolation (DSI) and compare them to other forms of isolation during dental treatment in children. Both authors independently searched engines using the keywords "Isolite", "Vacuum", "DryShield" and their combinations in March 2022. The inclusion criteria included peer-reviewed articles written in English and clinical trials that assessed the clinical efficiency, patient satisfaction, and future preference of ISI or DSI during dental treatment on healthy unaffected children and compared it to other isolation systems such as rubber dam and cotton roll. A total of five articles were included, and data were extracted by both authors independently and compiled into one single table.Five clinical trials were identified. The use of both ISI and DSI systems is associated with more noise, requires less chair time, is more comfortable, and is preferred by more children than rubber dam or cotton ball isolation.The review reports promising results in clinical efficiency, patient satisfaction, and future preference for both Isolite and DryShield isolation systems. Both systems require less chair time and were preferred by pediatric patients for future dental treatment when compared to both rubber dam and cotton roll isolation systems. Less fluid leaking and gagging reflex were reported when compared to cotton roll isolation. When compared to rubber dam isolation, they were associated with less discomfort.
No clinical trial protocols linked to this paper
Clinical trials are automatically linked when NCT numbers are found in the paper's title or abstract.PICO Elements
No PICO elements extracted yet. Click "Extract PICO" to analyze this paper.
Paper Details
MeSH Terms
Associated Data
No associated datasets or code repositories found for this paper.
Related Papers
Related paper suggestions will be available in future updates.