Trial reportJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2023
Survival rate of the Hall technique compared with resin composite restoration in multi-surface cavities in primary teeth: a 1-year randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02782390 (Efficacy of Hall Technique in Atypical Lesions on Primary Teeth), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Efficacy of Hall Technique in Atypical Lesions on Primary Teeth: Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative success of minimally invasive treatments for cavitated caries in primary teeth: a network meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Hall Technique Compared to Orthodontic Band Cementation in Carious Injuries in Deciduous Teeth of Children with Disabilities: Randomized Clinical Trial.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- The Hall technique: knowledge, practice, and concerns of dentists in primary care settings in the State of Qatar-a questionnaire-based survey.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHall technique (HT) has been indicated for teeth with dentinal caries lesion; however, extensive cavities, with more than two surfaces still seem challenging for restorative treatment in pediatric dentistry, resulting in a higher failure rate and an increased need for retreatment.
objectivesTo compare the survival rate of the Hall technique preformed metal crown (HT) with resin composite restoration (RC) for multi-surface cavitated caries lesions in primary molars. METHODOLOGY: In this multicenter two-arm randomized clinical trial, children between 4 and 9 years of age with at least one primary molar with cavitated caries lesion involving more than two surfaces, including one buccal or palatal/lingual surface, were selected from 17 Brazilian cities. A total of 364 teeth were allocated into two groups: (1) teeth treated with selective caries removal and RC and (2) treated with the HT. The survival rate was assessed at 6 and 12 months after the interventions. Survival analysis was performed with the Kaplan‒Meier method. Cox regression was used to determine the influence of explanatory variables on the survival rate (α=5%).
resultsAfter 12 months, 292 teeth were re-evaluated. A total of 358 teeth were re-evaluated at least once during the study and included in the survival analysis. The HT (87.8%) resulted in a higher survival rate than RC restoration (75.7%) (p=0.004).
conclusionHT has a higher survival rate than RC as a treatment for multi-surface cavitated caries lesions in primary teeth. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02782390.
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.