Question · asked by 1 review

Single-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer vs Multi-surface ART with high-viscosity GIC: Restoration failure

Population
Children (2-9 years) with caries in posterior primary teeth
Intervention
Single-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer
Comparison
Multi-surface ART with high-viscosity GIC
Outcome
Restoration failure

Single-surface ART restorations had a low reported mean annual failure rate (about 5%; ungraded).

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Single-surface ART with high-viscosity GIC vs Multi-surface ART with high-viscosity GIC
Mean annual restoration failure rate · Children (2-9 years) with caries in posterior primary teeth · First 3 years, Single-surface
Single-surface ART restorations had a low reported mean annual failure rate (about 5%; ungraded).
Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. (2022) All outcomes
Mean annual failure rate (%) 4.7% (van 't Hof 2006) to 5% (de Amorim 2018)Not reportedGRADE not reported

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review.
2022 All outcomes
August 202035Low / Low
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.