Costs (direct costs of interventions) · Adults and adolescents in any age group with restorations in the permanent dentition and children with restorations in the primary dentition
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Adverse effects · Adults and adolescents in any age group with restorations in the permanent dentition and children with restorations in the primary dentition
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Postoperative sensitivity, marginal adaptation, anatomic form and other clinical outcomes (USPHS restoration quality; includes tooth vitality and pulpitis) · Adults and adolescents in any age group with restorations in the permanent dentition and children with restorations in the primary dentition
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Restoration survival · Adults and adolescents in any age group with restorations in the permanent dentition and children with restorations in the primary dentition
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Restoration failure · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Aesthetic (resin-veneered) crowns showed no clear difference in restoration failure at 6 months compared with conventional metal (stainless steel) crowns; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Marginal integrity (cervical) failures at 24 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Compomer (Dyract) led to lower marginal integrity (cervical) failures at 24 months compared with amalgam (Tytin); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Surface texture failures at 24 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Compomer (Dyract) showed no clear difference in surface texture failures at 24 months compared with amalgam (Tytin); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Occlusion · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Aesthetic (resin-veneered) crowns led to lower occlusion at 6 months compared with conventional metal (stainless steel) crowns; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Cervical gaps on bitewing X-rays at 24 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Compomer (Dyract) showed no clear difference in cervical gaps on bitewing X-rays at 24 months compared with amalgam (Tytin); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Proximal contact at 6 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Aesthetic (resin-veneered) crowns led to lower proximal contact at 6 months compared with conventional metal (stainless steel) crowns; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Marginal integrity of restoration · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Aesthetic (resin-veneered) crowns led to lower marginal integrity at 6 months compared with conventional metal (stainless steel) crowns; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Marginal integrity (occlusal) failures at 24 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Compomer (Dyract) showed no clear difference in marginal integrity (occlusal) failures at 24 months compared with amalgam (Tytin); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Radiolucencies on bitewing X-rays at 24 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Compomer (Dyract) showed no clear difference in radiolucencies on bitewing X-rays at 24 months compared with amalgam (Tytin); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Replacement (failure) of Class II restoration at 12 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer) showed no clear difference in replacement (failure) of Class II restoration at 12 months compared with amalgam; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Gingival health at 6 months · Children aged 12 years or younger with tooth decay involving at least one tooth in the primary dentition, symptomatic or symptom free
Aesthetic (resin-veneered) crowns showed no clear difference in gingival health at 6 months compared with conventional metal (stainless steel) crowns; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review