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
Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures
Intervention
ART sealant using high-viscosity glass ionomer (press-finger technique)
Comparison
No comparator
Outcome
Caries-free sealed pits and fissures

The pooled caries-free rate was 85% at 6 years.

What each review found

Current versions only
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 6 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants vs No comparator
Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures · 6 years, School or clinic, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 6 years
The pooled caries-free rate was 85% at 6 years.
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes
Caries-free percentage 85 [79, 91]1 studyGRADE not reported
High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants vs No comparator
Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures · 5 years, School or clinic, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 5 years
The pooled caries-free rate was 90% at 5 years.
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes
Caries-free percentage 90 [85, 94]2 studiesGRADE not reported
High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants vs No comparator
Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures · 2 years, School or clinic, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 2 years
The pooled caries-free rate was 100% at 2 years.
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes
Caries-free percentage 100 [98, 100]3 studiesGRADE not reported
High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants vs No comparator
Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures · 1 year, School or clinic, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 1 year
The pooled caries-free rate was 100% at 1 year.
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes
Caries-free percentage 100 [99, 100]4 studiesGRADE not reported
High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants vs No comparator
Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures · 4 years, School or clinic, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 4 years
The pooled caries-free rate was 93% at 4 years.
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes
Caries-free percentage 93 [91, 96]2 studiesGRADE not reported
High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants vs No comparator
Caries-free sealed pits and fissures · Permanent teeth with sealed pits and fissures · 3 years, School or clinic, permanent dentitions with high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART sealants, 3 years
The pooled caries-free rate was 97% at 3 years.
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. (2011) All outcomes
Caries-free percentage 97 [96, 98]3 studiesGRADE not reported

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

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis.
2012 All outcomes
All publications listed until 1 February 201029Critically Low / Critically Low

The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.

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.