Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown): Failure of therapy
- Population
- Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally considered to need a restoration
- Intervention
- Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR)
- Comparison
- Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)
- Outcome
- Failure of therapy
Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) may leads to higher failure of therapy compared with hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious… · 30-60 months, Cavitated (not deep) lesions, primary dentition Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) may leads to higher failure of therapy compared with hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) (low certainty). Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes | OR 8.35 [3.73, 18.68] | 2 studies · 249 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2020-07 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and… · 1 review
- Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Stepwise carious tissue removal (SW) · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and… · 1 review
- Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Non-restorative cavity control (NRCC) · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and… · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.