Question · asked by 1 review
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs No comparator: Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention)
- Population
- Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth
- Intervention
- ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique)
- Comparison
- No comparator
- Outcome
- Retention of sealant (complete or partial retention)
High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants showed 4-year retention of 68% (95% CI 61-75%); 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) Sealant retention (partially and fully retained) · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 4 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, partially and fully retained high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants in permanent dentitions, 4 years High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants showed 4-year retention of 68% (95% CI 61-75%); evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.68 [0.61, 0.75] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Sealant retention (partially and fully retained) · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 2 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, partially and fully retained high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants in permanent dentitions, 2 years High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants showed 2-year retention of 82% (95% CI 77-86%); evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.82 [0.77, 0.86] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Sealant retention (partially and fully retained) · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 3 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, partially and fully retained high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants in permanent dentitions, 3 years High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants showed 3-year retention of 72% (95% CI 72-86%); evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.72 [0.72, 0.86] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Sealant retention (partially and fully retained) · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 1 year, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, partially and fully retained high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants in permanent dentitions, 1 year High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants showed 1-year retention of 75% (95% CI 51-91%); evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.75 [0.51, 0.91] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Sealant retention (partially and fully retained) · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 5 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, partially and fully retained high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants in permanent dentitions, 5 years High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants showed 5-year retention of 63% (95% CI 56-70%); evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.63 [0.56, 0.70] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique) vs None (single-arm survival proportion; no comparator) Sealant retention (partially and fully retained) · Pits and fissures of permanent (posterior) teeth · 6 years, Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries, partially and fully retained high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants in permanent dentitions, 6 years High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants showed 6-year retention of 59% (95% CI 51-67%); evidence ungraded. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes | Proportion 0.59 [0.51, 0.67] | 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 · 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.