Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32221490›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2020

ART with high viscosity GIC and composite restorations in class II cavities: can they thrive in the post-amalgam era?

Neeraj Gugnani, Shalini Gugnani

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Neeraj GugnaniDepartment of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, DAV (C) Dental College, Yamunanagar, Haryana, India.
Shalini GugnaniDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, DAV (C) Dental College Yamunanagar, Haryana, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Design This study is a parallel group randomised un-blinded trial with equal allocation to evaluate and compare the success of ART with HVGIC and composite restorations in class II cavities in permanent molars. Study population The study populations included 154 participants who were selected from 17 different schools of Bauru and adjoining areas in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Children with good general and oral health and having 1 or 2 class II cavities were chosen. Only one restoration per child which exhibited good occlusal contact was finally chosen for the purpose of study. The participants were then stratified as per DMFT-score and cavity size. After stratifying the participants in four conglomerates, they were randomly allocated to either ART with HVGIC or composite restoration group. Later, the participants were recalled at 6 and 12 months and the restorations were evaluated using ART and modified-USPHS criteria. Data analysis Frequency statistics, which included chi square, chi square for trend and Fisher's exact test, were used for determining the association between restoration type and different baseline variables and for determining the association between distribution of scores obtained with ART and composite restorations for different evaluation criteria. Results With ART criteria, success rates of ART and composite restoration were found to be 98.7% and 100% at 6 months while at 12 months the success rates were observed to be 98.7% and 95.8%, respectively. The distribution of scores at both the time periods was found to be statistically significant (p = 0.033). Same success rates were observed when the restorations were evaluated using modified-USPHS criteria, with statistical difference at the 6 month post-operative recall (p = 0.001), and non-significant difference at the 12 month recall visit (p = 0.310). Survival rates of ART and composite restoration were observed to be 94.8% and 98.7% with no-significant difference in the survival curves (p = 0.173)Conclusions In class II cavities in permanent molars, ART restorations with high viscosity GIC, done in a school setting exhibited similar success rates as composite restoration done in a clinical setting.

Indexed as

Dental CariesDental Restoration, PermanentBrazilChildComposite ResinsGlass Ionomer CementsHumansViscosityComposite ResinsGlass Ionomer Cements

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.