儿童和家长对传统和改良厅冠的成功率和接受度:一项随机临床试验。

IF 2
Areej Alqadi, Yara Marji, Ola B Al-Batayneh
{"title":"儿童和家长对传统和改良厅冠的成功率和接受度:一项随机临床试验。","authors":"Areej Alqadi, Yara Marji, Ola B Al-Batayneh","doi":"10.1007/s40368-025-01119-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The conventional Hall technique (CHT) is a recognised biological caries management approach. A modified Hall technique (MHT) involving minimal proximal slicing recently emerged with limited evidence. This study aimed to compare the success of MHT with CHT and evaluate their acceptance among children and parents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This split-mouth randomised clinical trial involved children aged 4-9 years. Procedural pain was assessed using the SEM (sound, eye and motor) and Wong-Baker FACES Pain-Rating (WBFP) scales, and treatment duration was recorded. Parents and children completed acceptance questionnaires, while clinical and radiographic success was evaluated at 6 and 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>N = 116 children received treatment; 100/116 attended the 6-month follow-up, and 114/116 attended the annual follow-up. Success rates were similar per technique (96% and 95.6% at 6 and 12 months, respectively) with no significant differences in success or duration (P = 1.00 and 0.114, respectively). SEM scores showed no significant difference per intervention (P = 0.298), and most children reported no pain on the WBFP scale following either intervention (66.3%). However, children (54% vs. 30%) and parents (44.7% vs. 39.5%) favoured the CHT versus MHT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both techniques achieved similar outcomes, but CHT was more favourable. The decision to utilise interproximal slicing ultimately lies with the dentist and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.</p>","PeriodicalId":520615,"journal":{"name":"European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Success rate and acceptability of conventional and modified hall crowns among children and parents: a randomised clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Areej Alqadi, Yara Marji, Ola B Al-Batayneh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40368-025-01119-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The conventional Hall technique (CHT) is a recognised biological caries management approach. A modified Hall technique (MHT) involving minimal proximal slicing recently emerged with limited evidence. This study aimed to compare the success of MHT with CHT and evaluate their acceptance among children and parents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This split-mouth randomised clinical trial involved children aged 4-9 years. Procedural pain was assessed using the SEM (sound, eye and motor) and Wong-Baker FACES Pain-Rating (WBFP) scales, and treatment duration was recorded. Parents and children completed acceptance questionnaires, while clinical and radiographic success was evaluated at 6 and 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>N = 116 children received treatment; 100/116 attended the 6-month follow-up, and 114/116 attended the annual follow-up. Success rates were similar per technique (96% and 95.6% at 6 and 12 months, respectively) with no significant differences in success or duration (P = 1.00 and 0.114, respectively). SEM scores showed no significant difference per intervention (P = 0.298), and most children reported no pain on the WBFP scale following either intervention (66.3%). However, children (54% vs. 30%) and parents (44.7% vs. 39.5%) favoured the CHT versus MHT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both techniques achieved similar outcomes, but CHT was more favourable. The decision to utilise interproximal slicing ultimately lies with the dentist and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520615,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-025-01119-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-025-01119-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:传统霍尔技术(CHT)是一种公认的生物龋齿管理方法。最近出现了一种涉及最小近端切片的改进Hall技术(MHT),但证据有限。本研究旨在比较MHT与CHT的成功,并评估其在儿童和家长中的接受程度。方法:该裂口随机临床试验纳入4-9岁儿童。采用扫描电镜(声音、眼睛和运动)和Wong-Baker FACES疼痛评分(WBFP)量表评估程序性疼痛,并记录治疗持续时间。父母和孩子完成接受问卷,同时在6个月和12个月时评估临床和放射学的成功程度。结果:N = 116例患儿接受治疗;100/116参加了6个月的随访,114/116参加了年度随访。每种技术的成功率相似(6个月和12个月分别为96%和95.6%),成功率或持续时间无显著差异(P分别= 1.00和0.114)。两种干预方式的SEM评分差异无统计学意义(P = 0.298),两种干预方式后大多数儿童在WBFP量表上均无疼痛报告(66.3%)。然而,儿童(54%对30%)和家长(44.7%对39.5%)倾向于CHT和MHT。结论:两种技术的效果相似,但CHT更有利。使用近端间切片的决定最终取决于牙医,必须根据具体情况进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Success rate and acceptability of conventional and modified hall crowns among children and parents: a randomised clinical trial.

Purpose: The conventional Hall technique (CHT) is a recognised biological caries management approach. A modified Hall technique (MHT) involving minimal proximal slicing recently emerged with limited evidence. This study aimed to compare the success of MHT with CHT and evaluate their acceptance among children and parents.

Methods: This split-mouth randomised clinical trial involved children aged 4-9 years. Procedural pain was assessed using the SEM (sound, eye and motor) and Wong-Baker FACES Pain-Rating (WBFP) scales, and treatment duration was recorded. Parents and children completed acceptance questionnaires, while clinical and radiographic success was evaluated at 6 and 12 months.

Results: N = 116 children received treatment; 100/116 attended the 6-month follow-up, and 114/116 attended the annual follow-up. Success rates were similar per technique (96% and 95.6% at 6 and 12 months, respectively) with no significant differences in success or duration (P = 1.00 and 0.114, respectively). SEM scores showed no significant difference per intervention (P = 0.298), and most children reported no pain on the WBFP scale following either intervention (66.3%). However, children (54% vs. 30%) and parents (44.7% vs. 39.5%) favoured the CHT versus MHT.

Conclusion: Both techniques achieved similar outcomes, but CHT was more favourable. The decision to utilise interproximal slicing ultimately lies with the dentist and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信