A comparison of caries removal technique using conventional and disposable airotor: a split-mouth study

Introduction A variety of methods, including hand instruments, high-speed and low-speed handpieces, chemomechanical techniques, air abrasion, ultrasonic instrumentation, and lasers, could be used to treat dental caries. The development of rotary devices like the micromotor and airotors was prompted by the traditional method of treating caries, which only used hand instruments and was painful and ineffective. Aim To evaluate the efficiency of conventional and disposable airotor in treating dental caries in children aged 6–12 years old. Materials and methods The split-mouth randomized controlled trial was designed on 60 teeth from 30 patients aged 6–12 years, involving caries removal techniques using conventional and disposable airotor. Ericson scale, stop-watch, animated emoji scale, and verbal pain scale were used to evaluate efficacy, time taken, patient acceptance, and pain threshold during caries removal. Results Intergroup comparison in terms of time taken for caries removal, patient acceptance and pain threshold showed a statistically significant difference between the conventional and disposable airotor concerning patient acceptance (P = 0.01) and pain threshold (P = 0.04). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in caries removal efficacy (P = 0.55). Conclusion Caries removal time and clinical efficacy were almost comparable with disposable and conventional airotor. The disposable airotor had more patient acceptance and less pain threshold when compared to the conventional airotor.