Trial reportClinical oral investigations2013
Survival rate of approximal-ART restorations using a two-layer technique for glass ionomer insertion.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Cost-efficacy of Atraumatic Restorations (ART) Using Different Encapsulated Glass Ionomer Cement
Giomer vs Glass Ionomer Cement for ART Occlusoproximal Restorations: a Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2020Pooled it
- Survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and sealants in posterior teeth: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2018Pooled it
- In vitro and in vivo evaluations of glass-ionomer cement containing chlorhexidine for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOBTrial
- Insertion methods and gap/void formation in atraumatic restorative technique: A micro-CT analysis.Brazilian dental journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGood survival rates (SR) have been reported for occlusal-atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations but not for approximal-ART restorations. The high-viscosity consistency of the glass ionomer cement (GIC) may lead to its incorrect adaptation into the cavity and thus to failure of the restoration. Because the use of a flowable GIC layer seemed to improve its adaptation in approximal restorations in vitro, we evaluated whether the use of an intermediate flowable GIC layer would improve the SR of approximal-ART restorations.
methodsA total of 208 children (6-7 years old) with at least one occluso-proximal carious lesion in a primary molar were selected and randomly allocated to two groups: G1, conventional technique, one-layer GIC (powder/liquid ratio 1:1); and G2, two-layer technique, consisting of a first layer of GIC with a flowable consistency (powder/liquid ratio 1:2) and a second layer of a regular consistency. Restorations were made by final-year students and evaluated after 1, 6, 12 and 18 months. Restoration survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival and logrank test. Poisson regression analyses (α = 5) were used to verify the influence of factors such as insertion technique, restoration surface and operators.
resultsThe overall SR of the restorations after 18 months was 68 %. There was no difference in SR between the techniques, neither did the other factors influence the SR.
conclusionsOver 18 months, the use of an intermediate flowable GIC layer in approximal-ART restorations does not improve the restoration survival. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study suggests that the two-layer technique is not the answer for increasing approximal-ART restoration longevity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.