![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/icon-moisture-tolerant-01-1.png)
Because of EQUIA Forte HT’s strong chemical bond and outstanding wettability there is no need for conditioning, bonding or placing a rubber dam. The bond strength is not compromised, even in the presence of saliva.
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/fast-01-1.jpg)
Fast
As there is no need to place a rubber dam, no need to layer (EQUIA Forte HT is a true* bulk-fill material) and no need for complex finishing and polishing (thanks to the coating). A finished restoration is already obtained in 3.5 minutes.
*EQUIA Forte HT has negligible shrinkage stress and unlimited depth of cure
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/easy-01-1.jpg)
Easy
The 5-step procedure of preparing, bulk filling, finishing, coating and light-curing without adaption of the procedure depending on the age of the teeth (young to sclerotic dentin) cannot be made any easier.
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/scientifically-proven-01.jpg)
Scientifically proven
Thanks to its unique interaction with the reinforcing coating, EQUIA Forte HT is a reliable long-term restorative system based on 12 years of proven clinical experience with EQUIA *
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/icon-scientifically-cost-effective-01-2.png)
Cost-effective
In a study involving 180 patients and 360 class II restorations, Glass-hybrids show a higher cost-effectiveness initially and after 3 years compared to Nano-Hybrid Composites.
Because of its ease of use, fast procedure time and self-adhesive capabilities,
EQUIA Forte HT is truly fit for everybody. From children to elderly or high-risk patients.
Videos
Clinical examples
Amalgam replacement
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Pic-7a_cut-2.jpg)
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Pic-7b_cut-2.jpg)
Matteo Basso, Italy
MIH
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Pic-6a_cut-2.jpg)
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Pic-6b_cut-2.jpg)
Patrick Rouas, France
Class I, Class II
(stress bearing and non-stress bearing)
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/EQUIA-Forte-Pic-5a.jpg)
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/EQUIA-Forte-Pic-5b.jpg)
Zeynep Kütük, Turkey
Paedodontic
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Paedodontic-8a_cut-1-1.jpeg)
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Paedodontic-8b_cut-1.jpeg)
Magda Kurkuba, Poland
Geriatric
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Geriatric-1.jpg)
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Geriatric-2.jpg)
Wim Klüter, Netherlands
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Equia-Forte-HT.png)
Downloads
An aesthetic and biomimetic approach with a glass hybrid for direct restorations – Ass. Prof. Zeynep Bilge Kütük, Turkey
Cost efficiency study reports
Cost-effectiveness of glass hybrid versus composite in a multi-country randomized trial
Glass hybrid versus composite for non-carious cervical lesions: Survival, restoration quality and costs in randomized controlled trial after 3 years
Long-term cost-effectiveness of glass hybrid versus composite in permanent molars
![](https://campaigns-gceurope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/EQUIA-Forte-HT-child-1.jpg)
Testimonials
* Studies
- Gurgan et al. A randomized controlled 10 years follow-up of a glass ionomer restorative material in class I and class II cavities. J Dent. 2020 Mar;94:103175. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2019.07.013.
EQUIA vs. composite - Gurgan et al. Clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system: a 6-year evaluation. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(7):2335-2343.
EQUIA vs. composite - Türkün et al. A Prospective Six-Year Clinical Study Evaluating Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cements with Resin Coating on Posterior Teeth: Quo Vadis? Oper Dent. 2016;41(6):587-598.
EQUIA vs. Riva Self Cure - Basso et al. 7 Years, Multicentre, Clinical Evaluation on 154 Permanent Restorations Made With a Glassionomer-based Restorative System. J Dent Res. 2016;95 Spec Issue B: #0446.
- Klinke T. et al. Clinical performance during 48 months of two current glass ionomer restorative systems with coatings: a randomized clinical trial in the field. Trials. 2016;17(1):239. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1339-8.
EQUIA vs. glass ionomer with conventional coating - Gurgan et al. 12-month Clinical-performance of a Glass-hybrid-restorative in Non-caries-cervical-lesions of Patients With Bruxism J Dent Res. 2018;97 Spec Issue A: #0235.
EQUIA Forte vs. composite - Shimada et al. Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of New GI-restorative (EQUIA Forte® HT). J Dent Res. 2019; 98 Spec Issue A: #3662.
EQUIA Forte HT - Y. Hokii et al. Fluoride Ion Release/Recharge Behavior of Ion-Releasing Restorative Materials, Dental Materials, Volume 35, Supplement 1, 2019 (Accepted for publication).
- Literature review, presented at IADR 2019 by Prof Soraya Coelho Leal.
- Miletic et al. Clinical Performance of a Glass-Hybrid System Compared with a Resin Composite in the Posterior Region: Results of a 2-year Multicenter Study. J Adhes Dent. 2020;22(3):235-247. doi: 0.3290/j.jad.a44547.
EQUIA Forte vs. Composite - Miletic et al. A five-year multicenter clinical study confirms EQUIA Forte is a suitable material for medium to large Class II restorations.