Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Dec;66(4):430-443.
doi: 10.1111/adj.12871. Epub 2021 Sep 2.

Atraumatic restorative treatment restorations performed in different settings: systematic review and meta-analysis

Jonathan Rafael Garbim  1 , Caroline Mariano Laux  1 , Tamara Kerber Tedesco  2 , Mariana Minatel Braga  2 , Daniela Prócida Raggio  1
Affiliations
Free article
Meta-Analysis

Atraumatic restorative treatment restorations performed in different settings: systematic review and meta-analysis

Jonathan Rafael Garbim et al. Aust Dent J. 2021 Dec.
Free article

Abstract

Background: There are potential barriers to using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach in conventional dental offices, as many professionals assume that it is only used for field conditions. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the survival data of ART restorations in permanent and primary teeth when performed in and out of the conventional environment.

Methods: Searches were performed on PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Open Grey databases up to April 2020. Studies that evaluated ART restorations were prospective and had survival rate data were included. The risk of bias was evaluated by Rob 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools. Meta-analyses were carried out considering as outcome the survival rate of primary and permanent teeth. Subgroups analysis was performed for setting and type of cavity (occlusal or multi-surface).

Results: Thirty-four studies were included. For primary teeth, in general, the overall percentage of survival rate was not influenced by setting, ranging up to 71% in 12 months to 65% in 36 months. Similarly, for permanent teeth, the overall percentage of survival rate was not influenced by setting, ranging up to 96% in 12 months to 61% in 36 months.

Conclusion: ART is a feasible approach for field settings as well as conventional dental offices.

Prospero: CRD42020184680.

Keywords: Atraumatic restorative treatment; glass ionomer cement; meta-analysis; restoration survival percentage; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Frencken JE, Leal SC. The correct use of the ART approach. J Appl Oral Sci 2010;18:1-4.
    1. Frencken JE. Evolution of the ART approach: highlights and achievements. J Appl Oral Sci 2009;17(spe):78-83.
    1. Lopez N, Simpser-Rafalin S, Berthold P. Atraumatic restorative treatment for prevention and treatment of caries in an underserved community. Am J Public Health 2005;95:1338-1339.
    1. Schriks MC, van Amerongen WE. Atraumatic perspectives of ART: psychological and physiological aspects of treatment with and without rotary instruments. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2003;31:15-20.
    1. Leal S, Bonifacio C, Raggio D, Frencken JE. Atraumatic restorative treatment: restorative component. Monogr Oral Sci 2018;27:92-102.

Substances

LinkOut - more resources