Question · asked by 1 review
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs No comparator: Caries-free sealed pits and fissures
- Population
- Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth
- Intervention
- ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique)
- Comparison
- No comparator
- Outcome
- Caries-free sealed pits and fissures
Pits and fissures sealed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants remained dentine lesion-free in 100% (95% CI 99-100%) at 1-year; evidence ungraded.
What each review found
Include earlier review versionsNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 6 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 1 year, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 1 year Pits and fissures sealed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants remained dentine lesion-free in 100% (95% CI 99-100%) at 1-year; evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 1.00 [0.99, 1.00] | 4 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 4 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 4 years Pits and fissures sealed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants remained dentine lesion-free in 93% (95% CI 91-96%) at 4-year; evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.93 [0.91, 0.96] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 2 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 2 years Pits and fissures sealed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants remained dentine lesion-free in 100% (95% CI 98-100%) at 2-year; evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 1.00 [0.98, 1.00] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 3 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 3 years Pits and fissures sealed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants remained dentine lesion-free in 97% (95% CI 96-98%) at 3-year; evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.97 [0.96, 0.98] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 5 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 5 years Pits and fissures sealed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants remained dentine lesion-free in 90% (95% CI 85-94%) at 5-year; evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.90 [0.85, 0.94] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 6 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 6 years Pits and fissures sealed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants remained dentine lesion-free in 85% (95% CI 79-91%) at 6-year; evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.85 [0.79, 0.91] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2012 All outcomes | All publications listed until 1 February 2010 | 29 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs No comparator · Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures · 1 review
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- Caries-preventive effect of a one-time application of composite resin and glass ionomer sealants after 5 years. · 2006 · included by 1 of these 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.