Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

3 questions · 3 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 1 · 33.3%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 33.3%Low 1 · 33.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

ART using composite resin vs Conventional treatment using composite resin

Restoration failure (primary dentition) · Children with carious primary teeth

It is very uncertain whether ART using composite resin changes restoration failure (primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using composite resin (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
24 months · Multiple surface lesions
OR 1.11 [0.54, 2.29]
1 study · 57 participants
Very low

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

Restoration failure (primary dentition) · Older adults with root caries in permanent (mature) teeth (mean age 75 years)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
Restoration failure (primary dentition): 0 studies; No studies included.
0 studies
No studies found

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

Restoration failure (primary dentition) · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… may leads to higher restoration failure (primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 to 24 months
OR 1.60 [1.13, 2.27]
5 studies · 643 participants
Low