Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

2 questions · 2 findings · 1 reviews · Oral Health

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 1 · 50%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

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

Failure of therapy · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) may leads to higher failure of therapy compared with hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
30-60 months · Cavitated (not deep) lesions, primary dentition
OR 8.35 [3.73, 18.68]
2 studies · 249 participants
Low

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

Efficiency, costs or cost-effectiveness · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally…

1 finding from 1 review

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