What do systematic reviews say?

Hall technique vs Non-restorative caries treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Satisfaction with treatment: No evidence available (Summary of findings 2).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Hall technique vs Non-restorative caries treatment

It is very uncertain whether preformed metal crown (fitted using the Hall Technique) changes adverse events: gingival bleeding compared with non-restorative caries treatment (very low certainty).

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Long term (12 months)
  RR 1.09 [0.42, 2.86]
  1 study · 92 participants
  Very low

Hall technique vs Compomer restoration or non-restorative caries treatment

Preformed metal (Hall) crowns had a low reported annual failure rate (3.1%) versus compomer (14.7%) in one RCT; low quality of evidence (ungraded).

• Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth without pulp therapy: a… 2022 All outcomes

  2.5 years / 30 months (Santamaria 2017) · University (Germany)
  Annual failure rate (%) PMC Hall technique 3.1%; compomer 14.7%
  1 study · 169 participants
  GRADE not reported

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall… showed no clear difference in adverse events: gingival bleeding compared with filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue…; GRADE not reported.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (up to 12 months)
  RR 1.69 [0.61, 4.66]
  2 studies · 226 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Long term (12 months)
  RR 1.74 [0.99, 3.06]
  2 studies · 195 participants
  Low

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Satisfaction with treatment: listed in the Summary of findings table with no data; the studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall… probably leads to lower pain compared with filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue… (moderate certainty).

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Long term (12 months to 24 months)
  RR 0.15 [0.04, 0.67]
  2 studies · 312 participants
  Moderate
• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (less than 12 months)
  Short term (less than 12 months): effect not estimable (Analysis 1.2.1; 64 teeth, 32 participants; one study, Hutcheson 2012).
  1 study · 64 participants
  GRADE not reported

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs No treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Crown versus no treatment was a planned comparison (Comparison 2: crown versus no crown or filling). No study evaluated crown versus no treatment; the only study in this comparison (Santamaria 2014) used active…
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not measure this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall… probably leads to lower discomfort associated with the procedure compared with filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue… (moderate certainty).

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  At time of dental appointment or within 24 hours
  RR 0.56 [0.36, 0.87]
  2 studies · 381 participants
  Moderate

Preformed crown (any material; conventional technique or Hall Technique) vs Filling (any material; with or without complete carious tissue excavation; with or without pulp treatment)

• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Short term (less than 12 months)
  Short term (less than 12 months): no failures in either group; effect not estimable (Analysis 1.1.1; 76 teeth, 38 participants; one study, Hutcheson 2012).
  1 study · 76 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Long term (12 months to 48 months)
  RR 0.18 [0.06, 0.56]
  3 studies · 346 participants
  Moderate

Any of the interventions (CR, SE, SW, sealing with sealant materials, Hall Technique, or NRCC) vs Each other, placebo, or no treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  None of the studies reported adverse effects.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Any of the interventions (CR, SE, SW, sealing with sealant materials, Hall Technique, or NRCC) vs Each other, placebo, or no treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  We found no studies reporting subjective evaluation of the treatments by participants.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Hall technique vs Compomer restoration or non-restorative caries treatment

No comparative effect estimate was reported; the review reports this three-arm comparison but tabulates only compomer failure.

• Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth without pulp therapy: a… 2022 All outcomes

  2.5 years · University · Class II
  Annual failure rate (%) PMC Hall technique 3.1%; compomer 14.7%
  1 study · 169 participants
  GRADE not reported

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

It is very uncertain whether selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) changes failure of therapy compared with hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24-36 months · Deep lesions, primary dentition
  OR 1.95 [0.57, 6.63]
  1 study · 72 participants
  Very low
• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  24 months · Cavitated but not deep lesions, primary dentition
  OR 8.94 [0.57, 139.67]
  2 studies · 586 participants
  Very low

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) may leads to higher failure of therapy compared with hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown) (low certainty).

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  30-60 months · Cavitated (not deep) lesions, primary dentition
  OR 8.35 [3.73, 18.68]
  2 studies · 249 participants
  Low

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: HT found more cost-effective than CR in primary teeth (Innes 2011; Santamaria 2018); not GRADE-rated.
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported