A systematic review of randomized controlled trials on survival rate of atraumatic restorative treatment compared with conventional treatment on primary dentition.

Abstract

Background: In this COVID era, it's critical to promote nonaerosol procedures. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) is one of them, and it's particularly effective in children for lowering anxiety, enhancing dental health, and giving restorative care.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the survival rate of ART compared with conventional treatment procedures in primary dentition.

Materials and methods: The review was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis statement and is been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021213729). The studies included comprised clinical investigations with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the survival rate of ART and conventional restorative treatments using the same or different restorative materials to treat carious lesion. RCTs in which ART was compared with conventional treatment on patients in the age group of 6-10 years with minimum follow-up of 6 months. Studies available as open access and free full text in PubMed, DOAJ, and Google Scholar databases, and published in English Language only were included in the study. Cochrane's collaboration tool for RCTs was used for the assessment of risk of bias.

Results: The survival rate of single surface and multiple surface in primary dentition treated according to the ART compared with conventional treatment was found to be similar.

Conclusion: The ART approach is equally helpful in managing dental caries in children and this method may be considered a useful intervention in clinical practice to enhance the dental health of children.