Atraumatic restorative treatment compared to the Hall Technique for occluso‑proximal carious lesions in primary molars; 36‑month follow‑up of a randomised control trial in a school setting

Araujo, Mariana Pinheiro, Innes, Nicola Patricia, Bonifacio, Clarissa Calil, Hesse, Daneila, Olegario, Isabel Cristina, Mendes, Fausto Medeiros and Raggio, Daniela Procida 2020. Atraumatic restorative treatment compared to the Hall Technique for occluso‑proximal carious lesions in primary molars; 36‑month follow‑up of a randomised control trial in a school setting. BMC Oral Health 20 , 318. 10.1186/s12903-020-01298-x

	PDF - Published Version Download (4MB)
	Archive (ZIP) (Additional Files 1-8) - Supplemental Material Download (673kB)

Abstract

Abstract Background: Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) and the Hall Technique (HT) are both minimally invasive, nonaerosol generating procedures (non-AGPs). They seem to have never been directly compared, nor has the HT been studied in a non-clinical setting. This study compared the HT and ART restorations placed in a school setting after 36 months. Methods: Children (5–10 yo) who had a primary molar with a dentinal occluso-proximal, cavitated carious lesion were allocated to the ART (selective removal) or HT arms. Primary outcome: restoration survival over 36-months (using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, log rank test, and Cox regression). Secondary outcomes: (1) occlusal vertical dimension (OVD) (1, 2, 3, 4 weeks) and (2) child self-reported discomfort; (3) treatment acceptability (immediately following interventions); (4) Child Oral Health Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL), before treatment and after 6 months and (5) a post hoc analysis of time to tooth exfoliation (1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36 months). Results: One-hundred and thirty-one children (ART = 65; HT = 66) were included (mean age = 8.1 ± 1.2). At 36 months, 112 (85.5%) children were followed-up. Primary outcome: restoration survival rates ART = 32.7% (SE = 0.08; 95% CI 0.17–0.47); HT = 93.4% (0.05; 0.72–0.99), p < 0.001; Secondary outcomes: (1) OVD returned to pre-treatment state within 4 weeks; (2) treatment discomfort was higher for the HT (p = 0.018); (3) over 70% of children and parents showed a high acceptability for treatments, with crown aesthetics being a concern for around 23% of parents; (4) Child OHRQoL improved after 6 months; and (5) teeth treated with the HT exfoliated earlier than those in the ART group (p = 0.007). Conclusions: Both ART and the HT were acceptable to child participants and their parents and all parents thought both restorations protected their child’s tooth. However, the crown appearance concerned almost a quarter of parents in the HT arm. Children experienced less discomfort in the ART group. Although both treatments can be performed in a non-clinical setting and have the advantage of being non-aerosol generating procedures (non-AGPs),

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Published Online
Status:	Published
Schools:	Dentistry
Additional Information:	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Publisher:	BioMed Central
ISSN:	1472-6831
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	16 November 2020
Date of Acceptance:	26 October 2020
Last Modified:	17 Nov 2020 15:11
URI:	http://orca.cf.ac.uk/id/eprint/136378

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item