Restoration failure · Children (3-13 years) with dentine caries in primary teeth, no pulpal involvement
ART with GIC was reported to increase the odds of restoration failure versus conventional restoration (OR 1.60; ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Pain during the procedure (primary analysis) · Children (3-13 years) with dentine caries in primary teeth, no pulpal involvement
The reported estimate for procedural pain with ART versus conventional treatment was inconclusive (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with carious primary teeth treated by atraumatic restorative treatment (hand-instrument caries removal), no pulp therapy
ART restorations (mainly GIC) had a wide annual failure rate (1.2-37.1%) across 10 RCTs, with technique affecting survival; low to unclear quality of evidence (ungraded).
1 finding from 1 review
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
Success or failure of restoration (as defined by the USPHS criteria) · Children with carious primary teeth
ART with high-viscosity GIC and amalgam had similar class I restoration success at 24 months (ungraded).
2 findings from 1 review
RR 1.07 [0.91, 1.27]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
RR 0.93 [0.83, 1.06]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
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
Survival rate 73
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival rate 95
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Survival rate 59
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Show 1 more finding
Survival rate 91
9 studies
GRADE not reported
Restoration survival · Children with occlusoproximal caries in primary teeth
The reported pooled ART success estimate was 1.04.
1 finding from 1 review
Restoration failure (permanent, mature teeth) · Adults with root caries in permanent (mature) teeth
ART using H-GIC showed no clear difference in restoration failure (permanent, mature teeth) compared with conventional treatment using RM-GIC (with local anaesthetic); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Restoration failure (primary dentition) · Children with carious primary teeth
ART using H-GIC led to higher restoration failure (primary teeth) compared with conventional treatment using composite (with local anaesthetic); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Pain (primary dentition) · Children with carious primary teeth
ART using H-GIC showed no clear difference in pain (primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using composite (with local anaesthetic); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
OR 2.22 [0.51, 9.61]
1 study
GRADE not reported
Participant experience · 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
Costs (direct and indirect) · 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
Secondary caries · Older adults with root caries in permanent (mature) teeth (mean age 75 years)
1 finding from 1 review
Pain · 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
Pain: Not measured.
0 studies
No studies found
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
Adverse events · 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
Restoration failure (permanent, mature dentition; root surfaces) · Older adults with root caries in permanent (mature) teeth (mean age 75 years)
It is very uncertain whether ART using resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC) changes restoration failure (permanent, mature dentition; root surfaces) compared with conventional treatment using RM-GIC (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Discomfort associated with the procedure · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)
ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… showed no clear difference in participant experience (discomfort during procedure) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Pain (during procedure, primary dentition) · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)
ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (H-GIC), hand… showed no clear difference in pain (during procedure, primary dentition) compared with conventional treatment using H-GIC (rotary instruments) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Costs (direct and indirect) · People with dental caries in primary teeth (mainly children)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review