ArticleClinical oral investigations2018
Three-year survival of ART high-viscosity glass-ionomer and resin composite restorations in people with disability.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of glass ionomer cements in the restorative treatment of radiation-related caries - a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Pooled 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
- A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Chemomechanical (Carie-Care™) Versus Conventional Caries Removal for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2025Trial
- In vivo study of the behavior of glass ionomer restorations in patients with special needs.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2024Trial
- Randomized clinical trial of class II restoration in permanent teeth comparing ART with composite resin after 12 months.Clinical oral investigations · 2019Trial
- Novel coating materials for glassionomer cement: formulation characteristics, surface adhesion and impact on microhardness.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Survival Rate of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Restorations in Primary Posterior Teeth in Children with High Risk of Caries in the Republic of Kosovo-1-Year Follow-up.European journal of dentistry · 2023Article
- The influence of hydrothermal fatigue on the clinically relevant functional properties of conventional glass-ionomer cements.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The clinical success of ART restorations and Hall technique in primary molars: a randomized 18-month follow-up study.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2023Article
- Outpatient dental care for people with disabilities under general anaesthesia in Switzerland.BMC oral health · 2020Article
- Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and Interim Therapeutic Restoration: A Review of the Literature.Dentistry journal · 2019Review
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the 3-year cumulative survival rate of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional resin composite restorations (CRT) placed in persons with disability. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients referred for restorative care to the Haemophilia Foundation special care service were treated by one of two specialists. Patients and/or caregivers were provided with written and verbal information regarding treatment options and selected the alternative they preferred. Treatment was provided as selected unless this option proved clinically unfeasible when an alternative technique was proposed. The treatment protocols were ART (hand instruments/high-viscosity glass-ionomer) in the clinic or CRT (rotary instrumentation/resin composite) in the clinic or under general anaesthesia (GA). After 6, 12, 24 and 36 months, two independent, trained and calibrated examiners evaluated restoration survival using established ART codes. The proportional hazard model with frailty corrections gave survival estimates over 3 years.
resultsSixty-six patients (13.6 ± 7.8 years) with 16 different disability profiles participated. CRT in the clinic proved feasible for five patients (13%), and 14 patients received CRT under GA (21%). ART was used for 47 patients (71.2%). Altogether, 298 dentine carious lesions were restored in primary and permanent teeth (182 ART; 116 CRT). The 3-year cumulative survival rates and jackknife standard errors for the 182 ART and 116 CRT restorations were 94.8 ± 2.1 and 82.8 ± 5.3%, respectively (p = 0.01).
conclusionsThe 3-year follow-up results confirm that ART is an effective treatment protocol. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients with disability, many of whom have difficulty coping with CRT, may benefit from the ART approach.
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.