Background: Periodontal Dressings are usually placed following periodontal surgery to obtain optimal healing and to insure a minimal patient discomfort. Several dressings are commercially available. A light-cured resin, used as a periodontal dressing claimed to be more biocompatible and esthetic. Aim: To compare the clinical efficacy of light-cured periodontal dressing with non-eugenol periodontal dressing following conventional flap surgery. Materials and Methods: In a split mouth study, 20 chronic periodontitis subjects requiring periodontal flap surgery on contralateral sides of the arch were selected and grouped into Group-1 (Barricaid) and Group-2 (Coe-Pak) on the basis of dressing placed post-operatively. Parameters recorded were Plaque Index, Modified Gingival Index at baseline, 1 week, 2 weeks and pain and discomfort were recorded at day-1, day-3 and day-7. Statistical analysis: Intragroup and intergroup comparison was done using Unpaired t test for parametric variables, repeated measure ANOVA and Mann Whitney U test for non-parametric variable. The post-operative assessment variables were analyzed using Chi Square test. Results: On intergroup comparison there was statistically significant reduction in plaque index and pain and discomfort scores in Group-1 as compared to Group-2. However when modified gingival index scores were compared, the differences were not statistically significant. Subjects found no unpleasant taste/smell, no burning sensation and better perception. Conclusions: The light-cured dressing showed better patient acceptability and proves to be a better alternative to non-eugenol dressing as a dressing material.
