Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

3 questions · 3 findings · 2 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 1 · 33.3%GRADE not reported 2 · 66.7%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

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

Secondary caries · Older adults with root caries in permanent (mature) teeth (mean age 75 years)

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
6 months
One study reported data on secondary caries for this comparison (Cruz 2016). The odds of secondary caries at six months were greater with ART than with conventional treatment.
1 study
GRADE not reported

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

Secondary caries · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)

1 finding from 1 review

Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
Two studies reported on secondary caries, but this outcome was not reported by trial arm (Yu 2004; Roeleveld 2006).
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) with glass ionomer cement (GIC) or glass ionomer material

Secondary prevention of caries · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Topical silver diamine fluoride (SDF) for preventing and managing dental caries in children and adults 2024 · Cochrane All outcomes
Primary and permanent dentition
No studies reported this outcome
0 studies
No studies found