Trial reportBMC oral health2016
Effectiveness of conventional treatment using bulk-fill composite resin versus Atraumatic Restorative Treatments in primary and permanent dentition: a pragmatic randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02568917 (Effectiveness of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and Conventional Restorations in Primary and Permanent Dentition), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Effectiveness of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and Conventional Restorations in Primary and Permanent Dentition: A Practice-based Clinical Trial
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled 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
- Pooled it
- Organic antibacterial modifications of high-viscosity glass ionomer cement for atraumatic restorative treatment: A review.The Japanese dental science review · 2024Review
- Application of Selected Biomaterials and Stem Cells in the Regeneration of Hard Dental Tissue in Paediatric Dentistry-Based on the Current Literature.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Microleakage of Direct Restorations-Comparisonbetween Bulk-Fill and Traditional Composite Resins:Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.European journal of dentistry · 2021Article
- The Effect of Occlusal Loading on Gingival Microleakage of Bulk Fill Composites Compared with a Conventional Composite.Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) · 2020Article
- Functional and aesthetic rehabilitation in posterior tooth with bulk-fill resin composite and occlusal matrix.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2020Article
- Clinical Behaviour and Marginal Sealing of Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Restorations Using Light Amplified High-Intensity LEDs Curing: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences · 2019Article
- Influence of Bulk-Fill Composites, Polimerization Modes, and Remaining Dentin Thickness on Intrapulpal Temperature Rise.BioMed research international · 2019Article
- Fracture resistance of pulpotomized and composite-restored primary molars: Incremental versus bulk-fill techniques.Dental research 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical studies are being conducted in less strict conditions in order to establish an adequate scientific basis for decision making. The aim of this pragmatic randomized clinical trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of single and multiple-surfaces restorations performed following the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) premises compared with Conventional Treatment (CT) using bulk fill composite restorations in primary and permanent teeth. METHODS/
designA total of 1,214 5-to-13 year-old children with at least one single or multiple-surface dentin caries lesion in primary or permanent molars will be selected in public schools of Barueri-SP, Brazil. The participants will be randomly assigned into 2 groups: CT (caries removal with bur and restoration performed with Scotchbond™ Universal Adhesive system associated with Filtek Bulk Fill - 3 M/ESPE) and ART (Caries removal with hand instruments and restoration with high viscosity glass ionomer cement Ketac Molar Easy Mix - 3 M/ESPE). Ten untrained dentists will perform the treatment in in dental offices located at public schools. The restorations will be evaluated after 6, 12 and 24 months by an independent trained and calibrated examiner. The restoration and tooth survival, the cost-effectiveness analysis between the two groups and the operators' preferences regarding the techniques will be also evaluated. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test will be applied for the restoration and tooth survival. All the average event rates in the two groups will be modelled and compared with a Cox proportional hazard shared frailty model since there is an operator-cluster effect. The significance level for all analyses will be 5 %. DISCUSSION: Our hypothesis is that despite similar expected effectiveness between ART using high viscosity GIC and conventional treatment using bulk fill composite resin when treating single or multiple-surface in posterior primary and permanent teeth, ART will present superior cost-effectiveness. The results of this trial will support decision-making by clinicians and policy makers.
trial registrationNCT02568917 . Registered on May 10th 2015.
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.