Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

14 questions · 39 findings · 3 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 39 · 100%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Multiple-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer vs Single-surface ART with high-viscosity GIC

Restoration survival · Children with decayed primary molar teeth

Multi-surface ART/HVGIC restorations had lower reported survival (49% at 3 years) than single-surface restorations (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
3 years · Multi-surface
Survival rate (%) 49
9 studies
GRADE not reported

Single-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer vs Multi-surface ART with high-viscosity GIC

Restoration survival · Children with decayed primary molar teeth

Single-surface ART/HVGIC restorations had high reported survival (86% at 3 years), significantly higher than multi-surface restorations (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
3 years · Single-surface
Survival rate (%) 86
9 studies
GRADE not reported

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Permanent posterior teeth with single-surface cavities

The pooled survival rate was 93% at 2 years.

6 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · School clinic or field · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 2 years
Survival percentage 93 [89, 95]
13 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
4 years · School clinic or field · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 4 years
Survival percentage 86 [78, 93]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
6 years · School clinic or field · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 6 years
Survival percentage 72 [67, 76]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Show 3 more findings

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
5 years · School clinic or field · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 5 years
Survival percentage 80 [76, 83]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
3 years · School clinic or field · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 3 years
Survival percentage 85 [77, 91]
6 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · School clinic or field · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 1 year
Survival percentage 96 [94, 97]
15 studies
GRADE not reported

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Permanent posterior teeth with multiple-surface cavities

The pooled survival rate was 41% at 2 years.

3 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · School · multiple-surface permanent posterior teeth, 2 years
Survival percentage 41 [18, 67]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · School · multiple-surface permanent posterior teeth, 1 year
Survival percentage 86 [59, 98]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
5 years · School · multiple-surface permanent posterior teeth, 5 years
Survival percentage 77 [56, 92]
1 study
GRADE not reported

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Primary posterior teeth with single-surface cavities

The pooled survival rate was 95% at 1 year.

3 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · School or clinic · single-surface primary posterior teeth, 1 year
Survival percentage 95 [91, 98]
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
3 years · School or clinic · single-surface primary posterior teeth, 3 years
Survival percentage 66 [13, 99]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · School or clinic · single-surface primary posterior teeth, 2 years
Survival percentage 93 [91, 94]
6 studies
GRADE not reported

High-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Primary posterior teeth with multiple-surface cavities

The pooled survival rate was 62% at 2 years.

3 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · School or clinic · multiple-surface primary posterior teeth, 2 years
Survival percentage 62 [51, 73]
6 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · School or clinic · multiple-surface primary posterior teeth, 1 year
Survival percentage 71 [60, 80]
8 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
3 years · School or clinic · multiple-surface primary posterior teeth, 3 years
Survival percentage 31 [2, 77]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

High-viscosity GIC atraumatic restorative treatment vs No control

Restoration survival · Children with decayed primary molar teeth

Multi-surface ART restorations had a reported survival rate of 73% at 1 year.

4 findings from 1 review

Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
1 year · Multi-surface
Survival rate 73
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
1 year · Single-surface
Survival rate 95
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
2 years · Multi-surface
Survival rate 59
9 studies
GRADE not reported

Show 1 more finding

Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
2 years · Single-surface
Survival rate 91
9 studies
GRADE not reported

High-viscosity GIC atraumatic restorative treatment vs Amalgam or composite resin restoration

Restoration survival · Children with occlusoproximal caries in primary teeth

The reported pooled ART success estimate was 1.04.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
2–3 years
Pooled ART success estimate (Raggio 2013; not an odds ratio) 1.04
3 studies
GRADE not reported

High-viscosity GIC atraumatic restorative treatment vs Conventional restoration

Restoration survival · Children with occlusoproximal caries in primary teeth

Multiple reviews reported similar restoration survival for ART versus conventional restorations in occlusoproximal cavities (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review. 2022 All outcomes
2-3 years · Occlusoproximal cavities (Raggio 2013; Tedesco 2017)
OR OR 0.298-1.267 (Raggio 2013); Tedesco 2017 ORs 0.298/0.710/1.26 (NS)
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported

Single-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Permanent posterior teeth with single-surface cavities

Single-surface high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations in permanent teeth had high 2-year survival (93%, 95% CI 89-95%); evidence ungraded.

6 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 2 years
Proportion 0.93 [0.89, 0.95]
13 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
6 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 6 years
Proportion 0.72 [0.67, 0.76]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 1 year
Proportion 0.96 [0.94, 0.97]
15 studies
GRADE not reported

Show 3 more findings

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
5 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 5 years
Proportion 0.80 [0.76, 0.83]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
4 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 4 years
Proportion 0.86 [0.78, 0.93]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
3 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface permanent posterior teeth, 3 years
Proportion 0.85 [0.77, 0.91]
6 studies
GRADE not reported

Single-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Primary posterior teeth with single-surface cavities

Single-surface high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations in primary teeth had high 2-year survival (93%, 95% CI 91-94%); evidence ungraded.

3 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface primary posterior teeth, 2 years
Proportion 0.93 [0.91, 0.94]
6 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
3 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface primary posterior teeth, 3 years
Proportion 0.66 [0.13, 0.99]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · single-surface primary posterior teeth, 1 year
Proportion 0.95 [0.91, 0.98]
9 studies
GRADE not reported

Multiple-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Primary posterior teeth with multiple-surface cavities

Multiple-surface high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations in primary teeth had moderate 2-year survival (62%, 95% CI 51-73%); evidence ungraded.

3 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · multiple-surface primary posterior teeth, 2 years
Proportion 0.62 [0.51, 0.73]
6 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · multiple-surface primary posterior teeth, 1 year
Proportion 0.71 [0.60, 0.80]
8 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
3 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · multiple-surface primary posterior teeth, 3 years
Proportion 0.31 [0.02, 0.77]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Multiple-surface ART restoration using high-viscosity glass ionomer vs No comparator

Restoration survival · Permanent posterior teeth with multiple-surface cavities

Multiple-surface high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations in permanent teeth had high 1-year survival (86%, 95% CI 59-98%); evidence ungraded.

3 findings from 1 review

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
1 year · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · multiple-surface permanent posterior teeth, 1 year
Proportion 0.86 [0.59, 0.98]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
5 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · multiple-surface permanent posterior teeth, 5 years
Proportion 0.77 [0.56, 0.92]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. 2011 All outcomes
2 years · Dental clinics, primary schools and field settings across 18 countries · multiple-surface permanent posterior teeth, 2 years
Proportion 0.41 [0.18, 0.67]
1 study
GRADE not reported

Alternative alloy FDP (e.g., Ceramalloy II / base-metal / palladium-silver) vs High-gold content control alloy FDP (Olympia)

Restoration survival · Patients receiving crowns and FDPs; split-mouth, 10-year

Alternative alloy FDP (e.g., Ceramalloy II / base-metal /… led to higher restoration survival (Ceramalloy II versus Olympia) compared with high-gold content control alloy FDP (Olympia); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
10 years
OR 3.5 [1.4, 8.7]
1 study
GRADE not reported