This randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the patient’s preference and chair time needed during pit and fissure sealant placement under three isolation techniques (Isolite system, rubber dam isolation, and cotton roll isolation). Participants, aged 6–15 years and requiring four sealants on the first or second permanent molars, attending the pediatric dental clinics at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria. Each participant received sealants on three random first or second permanent molars using three isolation techniques. The time required for sealant placement was recorded for each technique. Following sealant placement, an interview-based questionnaire was administered to the participants to evaluate their preference regarding the isolation techniques. Forty-eight children (23 male and 25 female) with a mean age of 8.58 ± 1.93 years participated in this study. The mean chair times were 248.14, 255.89, and 243.29 s for the Isolite system, rubber dam isolation, and cotton roll isolation, respectively. Approximately 79% of participants considered cotton roll isolation to be the most comfortable, whereas approximately 71% were significantly less likely to use rubber dam isolation again. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in sealant placement time among the three isolation techniques. However, cotton roll isolation was the technique that was most preferred by the participants.

Background Clinical studies comparing retention rates of pit and fissure sealants placed under Isolite, rubber dam, and cotton roll combined have not been conducted until now. Aim To evaluate the retention rate of pit and fissure sealants (PFS) placed under three different isolation techniques (Isolite system [IS], rubber dam isolation [RDI], and cotton roll isolation [CRI]). Design One hundred and forty‐four teeth from 48 children aged 6–15 years attending paediatric dental clinics at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia were randomized to receive three PFS using three isolation techniques. The children that met the inclusion criteria were randomized by a simple block random allocation method. All PFS were placed by an operator and evaluated by a blinded evaluator. The evaluation scores were recorded at baseline and followed up over a period of 12–22 months. Results The children's mean age was 8.58 ± 1.93 years. Seven patients were lost to follow‐up. A total of 123 teeth were clinically evaluated; of these teeth, 22% had completely retained sealants, whereas approximately 66% had a partial loss of sealants, and approximately 12% had a complete loss of sealants. There were, however, no significant differences between the three isolation techniques on the retention rate of pit and fissure sealant. Conclusion The types of isolation had no impact on the retention rate of pit and fissure sealant.

No abstract