4.1 Article

Six-year follow up of atraumatic restorative treatment restorations placed in Chinese school children

Journal

COMMUNITY DENTISTRY AND ORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 35, Issue 5, Pages 387-392

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2006.00342.x

Keywords

atraumatic restorative treatment; cohort study; dental filling; glass-ionomer; survival analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical performance of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations placed in school children in China over a 6-year period. Methods: This study was implemented in 1996 and 294 ART restorations were placed in 197 children aged 12-13 years by five assistant dentists in four schools. Standard ART procedures and instruments were used combined with a high-strength glass-ionomer restorative material. One examiner evaluated the restorations annually using the ART criteria while at 5 years an independent external examiner used US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Results: Fifty-eight per cent of the restorations were followed for 6 years. At the 6-year evaluation examination, 76% and 59% of the small and large restorations respectively were present and were without major wear or defect (P < 0.01). Similar results were obtained when using the USPHS criteria. Results of a multilevel survival analysis show that the correlation between restoration failure and operator was small but failure of restorations placed in the same child was substantial. Net wear of the small and large restorations after 6 years were 176 and 172 mu m respectively (P > 0.05). Conclusions: The 6-year survival rate of the class I ART restorations in this study, especially the smaller ones, was satisfactory. This suggests that the ART approach can be used in the school setting to improve the oral health of large populations of underserved children.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available