What do systematic reviews say?

Hall technique vs Non-restorative caries treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Ozone applied to the carious lesion (10 or 40 seconds), with a fluoride reductant and oral hygiene/preventive advice vs No ozone, with a fluoride reductant and oral hygiene/preventive advice (as in the intervention group)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Ozone therapy for the treatment of dental caries 2004 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No data were provided in any of the included trials on costs.
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)

• Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin‐based composite restorations 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes
  One study (Strober 2013) reported cost, concluding that eliminating a resin-modified glass ionomer lining could save approximately USD 4.50 per filling (about USD 2000 per dentist per year). No comparative effect…
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Direct resin composite veneer vs Indirect resin composite veneer

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Direct versus indirect veneer restorations for intrinsic dental stains 2004 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Planned outcome; cost of treatment was not reported by the included trial.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Rubber dam vs Isolite system

It is very uncertain whether rubber dam isolation changes costs: operation/chair time compared with isolite system (very low certainty).

• Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Pit and fissure sealing (permanent molars)
  MD 9.36 [8.42, 10.30]
  1 study · 42 participants
  Very low

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs Conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies reported on costs for this comparison.
  0 studies
  No studies found

ART using resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC) vs Conventional treatment using RM-GIC

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies reported on costs for this comparison.
  0 studies
  No studies found

ART using composite resin vs Conventional treatment using composite resin

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies reported on costs for this comparison.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Rubber dam isolation and moisture control (alone or with saliva aspiration) vs Cotton rolls (with or without saliva aspiration)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Rubber dam isolation and moisture control (alone or with saliva aspiration) vs Cotton rolls (with or without saliva aspiration)

It is very uncertain whether rubber dam isolation and moisture control (alone or with saliva… changes costs: treatment/operation time compared with cotton rolls (with or without saliva aspiration) (very low certainty).

• Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  NCCL composite (Loguercio); fissure sealing (Ammann, narrative)
  MD -0.40 [-2.26, 1.46]
  1 study · 30 participants
  Very low

Rubber dam vs Isolite system

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Resin composite restorations containing antibacterial agents vs Non-antibacterial containing composite restorations

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Antibacterial agents in composite restorations for the prevention of dental caries 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No studies were included in this review, as we were unable to find any trials directly comparing antibacterial containing composites to other active interventions or controls.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Flossing plus toothbrushing (self-performed; manual or automated floss) vs Toothbrushing alone

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Flossing for the management of periodontal diseases and dental caries in adults 2011 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Not reported. No included study measured the economic or resource cost of flossing; the review notes it may be important to measure in future trials.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Stepwise carious tissue removal (SW)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Permanent and primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: SE found more cost-effective than SW in permanent (Labib 2019) and primary teeth (Elhennawy 2021); not GRADE-rated.
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: HT found more cost-effective than CR in primary teeth (Innes 2011; Santamaria 2018); not GRADE-rated.
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

Hall technique vs Non-restorative cavity control (NRCC)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: HT found more cost-effective than NRCC in primary teeth (Santamaria 2018); not GRADE-rated.
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions

In children younger than 6 years, OHPPs were associated with lower cost per DMFT/S (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.32; ungraded).

• Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Oral-Health Promotion in Dental Caries Prevention among Children:… 2019 All outcomes

  Community settings: home visits, telephone contacts, healthcare centers, and primary schools · Age < 6 years
  OR 0.07 [0.02, 0.32]
  6 studies
  GRADE not reported

Oral-health promotion programs (OHPPs): community-based oral-health education/training, supervised toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste and topical fluoride, dental screening, and dietary advice vs No oral-health promotion program, or a differing (usual-care) action under similar conditions

OHPPs were associated with a lower program cost per DMFT/S in about 97 of 100 programs (OR 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.11; ungraded, very high heterogeneity I2=99%).

• Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Oral-Health Promotion in Dental Caries Prevention among Children:… 2019 All outcomes

  Community settings: home visits, telephone contacts, healthcare centers, and primary schools
  OR 0.03 [0.01, 0.11]
  8 studies
  GRADE not reported

Dental treatments, care, and services (the decision context) vs No comparator

Out-of-pocket payment (cost) was the most frequently reported factor influencing patients' dental treatment decisions (N=136 articles; ungraded).

• Decision-making regarding dental treatments - What factors matter from patients' perspective? A systematic review. 2025 All outcomes

  Multiple countries (UK, Saudi Arabia, USA, India, Brazil, Turkey, Germany, Canada, etc.)
  'Out-of-pocket payment' (and synonyms, e.g., 'cost') was the most frequently identified factor: mentioned in N=136 articles with the highest code frequency (n=151); most prevalent factor in 7 of the 8 countries with…
  136 studies
  GRADE not reported