Question · asked by 1 review
Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite): Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales)
- Population
- Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth
- Intervention
- Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)
- Comparison
- Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite)
- Outcome
- Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions onlyNo studies found 3 · 100%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth · Medium term (less than 5 years) or long term (5 years and above) The review found no eligible studies for this question. Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite (2014) · Cochrane All outcomes | No randomised controlled trials were found | 0 studies | No studies found |
Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth · Medium term (less than 5 years) or long term (5 years and above) The review found no eligible studies for this question. Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite (2010) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD005971.PUB2, superseded | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies found |
Repair of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) vs Replacement of a defective resin composite restoration in a permanent molar or premolar tooth (with resin composite) Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · Adults (16 years or over) with one or more defective resin composite restoration(s) in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth · Medium term (less than 5 years) or long term (5 years and above) The review found no eligible studies for this question. Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite (2006) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD005971, superseded | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2013-07 | Not listed | Not assessed |
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.