What do systematic reviews say?

ART using glass ionomer cement (GIC) vs Amalgam restoration

• Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Ling 2003 assessed participant co-operation during procedures, showing a co-operation rate in the ART group significantly higher than in the control group (no summary statistic reported).
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

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 participant experience for this comparison.
  0 studies
  No studies found

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

ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… showed no clear difference in participant experience (discomfort during procedure) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments); GRADE not reported.

• Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Multiple lesions, children 6 to 8 years
  OR 0.95 [0.51, 1.79]
  1 study · 220 participants
  GRADE not reported