Is ART really atraumatic? Survival of ART and Amalgam Restorations in Permanent Teeth of Children after 6.3 Years The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach to restoring primary teeth in a standard dental clinic. Six-Year Success Rates of Occlusal Amalgam and Glass-Ionomer Restorations Placed Using Three Minimal Intervention Approaches An atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique: evaluation after one year. Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity preparations: 2-year results. Managing dental caries with atraumatic restorative treatment in children: successful experience in three Latin American countries. Amalgam and ART restorations in children: a controlled clinical trial Effectiveness of ART and traditional amalgam approach in restoring single-surface cavities in posterior teeth of permanent dentitions in school children after 6.3 years. Is high-viscosity glass-ionomer-cement a successor to amalgam for treating primary molars? The effects of two cavity preparation methods on the longevity of glass ionomer cement restorations: an evaluation after 12 months. Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional cavity preparations for glass-ionomer restorations in primary molars: one-year results. Effectiveness of Three Minimal Intervention Approaches for Managing Dental Caries: Survival of Restorations after 2 Years Restoration of permanent teeth in young rural children in Cambodia using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique and Fuji II glass ionomer cement. Provision of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) restorations to Chinese pre-school children--a 30-month evaluation. Effectiveness of Glass-Ionomer (ART) and Amalgam Restorations in the Deciduous Dentition: Results after 3 Years Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART): a three-year clinical study in Malawi--comparison of conventional amalgam and ART restorations. COMPARISON OF TWO MINIMALLY INVASIVE METHODS ON THE LONGEVITY OF GLASS IONOMER CEMENT RESTORATIONS: SHORT-TERM RESULTS OF A PILOT STUDY Clinical Trial of a New Glass Ionomer for an Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Technique in Class I Restorations Placed in Latvian School Children ART and Conventional Root Restorations in Elders after 12 Months Reasons for restorative therapy and the longevity of restorations in adults Survival rates of two atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) types in occlusal carious permanent teeth after two years. Self-report of pain in children treated according to the atraumatic restorative treatment and the conventional restorative treatment--a pilot study.
Atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) is an approach to the management of carious lesions that uses only h and instruments to remove carious tissue and to restore the tooth involved . The name ART implies that the approach is atraumatic to both the patient and the tooth . This study set out to evaluate whether ART is atraumatic in terms of both patient discomfort and tooth tissue conservation .  Three hundred and fifty-nine patients were divided in two groups : one group was treated with h and instruments and the other with rotary equipment . Each patient received two restorations : one using amalgam and one using glass ionomer as the restorative material , placed without the use of anaesthesia . Less discomfort was reported with the ART approach compared to conventional restorations made using rotary instruments and amalgam . Moreover , preparations with h and instruments were smaller than those produced with rotary instruments . Reported discomfort was associated with the size of the preparation , although the influence of the operator on both criteria was considerable . A patient effect was also observed since patients who reported discomfort during the first treatment were more likely to report discomfort after the second treatment . In conclusion , the choice of the term " ART " as an atraumatic procedure is defensible The null hypothesis tested was that there is no difference in the survival percentages of all restorations placed through the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) approach , with high-viscosity glass ionomer , and those produced through the traditional approach , with amalgam ( TA ) , in the permanent dentitions of children after 6.3 years . Using a parallel group design , we r and omly assigned a total of 370 children , aged 6 to 9 years , to the ART group and 311 children , also aged 6 to 9 years , to the TA group . Eight dentists placed a total of 1117 single- and multiple-surface restorations . The cumulative survival percentages  for ART glass-ionomer restorations were statistically significantly higher than those of amalgam restorations at all time intervals except the first ( p ≤ 0.044 ) . After 6.3 years , the cumulative survival percentages of ART and amalgam restorations were 66.1 % ( SE = 3.1 % ) and 57.0 % ( SE = 3.3 % ) , respectively . We concluded that the restorations produced with the ART approach , with high-viscosity glass ionomer , survived longer than those produced with the traditional approach , with amalgam , in the permanent teeth of young children OBJECTIVES The aims of this study are to assess the feasibility of the  Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) approach in primary teeth and to compare the ART approach with traditional amalgam restorations in primary molars . METHODS This study was conducted in a paediatric dentistry clinic in Kuwait between April 1999 and December 2001 . The ART and amalgam restorations were placed r and omly on comparable pairs of primary molars , if available . In addition , the ART approach was used for other primary teeth that had no pulpal involvement and no perceived pain before treatment . The restorations were assessed by both the ART evaluation criteria and USPHS criteria in August-September 2000 and in August-December 2001 . The mean follow-up period for the restorations was 8.3 months in the first assessment ( 2000 ) and 22 months in the second assessment ( 2001 ) . The assessment was possible for 35 children ( mean age = 5.7 years ) , 18 of whom had comparable pairs ( n = 35 pairs ) of restorations in their primary molars . In addition , 48 other ART restorations  were assessed in 2000 and 42 in 2001 . RESULTS In a 2-year follow-up , 89.6 % of all ART restorations were considered successful . The failure rate of the comparable pairs of ART and amalgam restorations was 5.7 % . There was no significant difference in success rate between ART and amalgam techniques . CONCLUSIONS Based on a 2-year follow-up evaluation , the class I ART restorations seemed to have a high success rate , indicating the appropriateness of the ART approach in primary teeth The present r and omised clinical trial was aim ed at comparing three minimally invasive restorative treatment approaches for managing dental caries in occlusal surfaces using a non-gamma-2 amalgam and a low-viscosity glass-ionomer as the restorative material . The treatment approaches tested in parallel groups were : conventional in a university setting , modified-conventional and ultraconservative ( Atraumatic Restorative Treatment , ART ) approaches in a field setting . A split-mouth design was used in which the two restorative material s were r and omly placed in 430 matched contralateral pairs of permanent molar teeth . A total of 152 children from five primary schools were recruited and treated by a dental therapist . The restorations were evaluated after 6 years by 2 calibrated independent examiners . The 6-year successes for all occlusal amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations were 72.6 and 72.3 % , respectively . There were no statistically significant differences observed between the successes for both amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations placed either by the ART ( 68.6 % , with 95 % CI = 61–76 % ) approach or by the conventional ( 74.5 % , with 95 % CI = 65–82 % ) and the modified-conventional ( 75.8 % , with 95 % CI = 67–83 % ) approaches after 6 years . There was also no statistically significant difference observed between the successes of occlusal ART restorations  with glass-ionomer ( 67.1 % , with 95 % CI = 56–77 % ) and occlusal conventional restorations with amalgam ( 74 % , with 95 % CI = 61–85 % ) after 6 years . ‘ Restoration fracture/marginal defects ’ and ‘ loss of material ’ were the most common causes for failure . The former was more often recorded in amalgam restorations and the latter in glass-ionomer restorations .  Secondary caries was observed for 2 % of glass-ionomer and for 10 % of amalgam restorations . This difference was statistically significant ( p = 0.001 ) . The ART approach using glass-ionomer performed equally well as conventional restorative approaches using electrically driven equipment and amalgam for treating dentinal lesions in occlusal surfaces after 6 years Extraction is the most common dental treatment provided for people in rural and suburban areas in many less-industrialised countries . By comparison , restorative care is rarely provided . In order to improve such situations , a treatment technique has been developed based only on h and excavation of carious lesions and using glass-ionomer cement as a filling material and a sealant . This Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) technique follows the concept of minimal intervention and does not require electrically driven equipment . This paper reports on the longevity of fillings and sealants placed using the technique under field conditions in rural Thail and .  Dental caries was treated using the ART technique in one village , whilst the population in a second village received restorative care ( amalgam fillings ) through mobile dental units . A third village was the control . After one year , 79 per cent of single surface ART fillings and 55 per cent of ART fillings of greater than one surface placed in deciduous teeth were judged successful . The success rate of ART fillings  in the permanent dentition ( mainly single surface fillings ) was 93 per cent and the retention rate for sealants was 78 per cent . Children were pleased at having received treatment by this technique and showed little fear . The ART technique is a promising caries treatment procedure for use in rural and sub-urban areas in less-industrialised countries OBJECTIVE To compare the survival of  glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) restorations placed in a dental clinic setting using both the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach with h and instruments , and conventional cavity preparation with rotary instruments . METHOD AND MATERIAL S Two encapsulated high-strength conventional GICs ( Fuji IX GP , Ketac-Molar Aplicap ) were placed in 82 Class I and 53 Class II preparations and one encapsulated non-gamma 2 amalgam alloy ( GK-amalgam ) was placed in 32 Class I preparations , in the primary molars of 60 Chinese children with a mean age of 7.40 + /- 1.24 ( SD ) years . Thus , 9 treatment groups were formed . RESULTS After two years , there were no significant survival differences found among 7 of the 9 treatment groups ( p = 0.99 ) . However , two groups comprising Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar Aplicap placed in Class II cavities prepared using the ART approach showed significantly lower restoration survivals ( p < 0.001 ) . Only 3 of the 72 initially sealed fissures adjacent to the restorations appeared to retain any GIC material . CONCLUSIONS In a clinic setting , both the ART h and instrument and conventional rotary instrument methods were equally suitable for high Class I restoration survival , but not for Class II restoration survival where the conventional cavity preparation method was preferable OBJECTIVE To compare survival rates and cost differentials between the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) technique and amalgams by type of dental personnel in Ecuador , Panama , and Uruguay . METHODS Children 7 to 9 years of age in rural and urban schools with at least one lesion with initial cavitated enamel caries or a dentinal lesion on a first permanent molar were selected and r and omized into the ART ( intervention ) or amalgam ( control ) group . Restoration failure was evaluated at 12 and 24 months . Cooperation and pain experienced during the procedures were measured . Cumulative and incident failure of restorations at 12 and 24 months was calculated for dentists who placed ART or amalgam restorations and auxiliaries who placed ART restorations at 12 months only . RESULTS The total sample comprised 1 629 children . Study groups were similar by country , gender , and geographic location . Cumulative failure rate at 12 months varied by group : dentists ' amalgam , 0.9 % to 5.7 % ; dentists ' ART , 2.0 % to 10.5 % ; and auxiliaries ' ART , 5.7 % to 15.8 % . At 24 months , higher cumulative failures were observed for the dentists ' amalgam group compared with the dentists ' ART group in Ecuador and Panama but not in Uruguay . Amalgam was least likely to have the best level of cooperation and an auxiliary using ART was associated with the least pain . The cost of using the ART approach  for dental caries treatment , including retreatment , was roughly half that of using amalgam without retreatment . CONCLUSIONS Having auxiliary personnel perform ART will lead to treatment survival that is expected to be lower than dentists using amalgam or ART . In spite of the greater risk of failure , the rate is not unacceptable and potential cost savings are substantial Objectives The aims of this study were to compare 2-year cumulative survival rates of  amalgam and atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) restorations in primary molars and to investigate the determinants of the survival rate of restorations . Material s and methods A controlled clinical trial using a parallel group design was carried out on 258 children aged 6–7 years old , allocated to two treatment groups : conventional restorative treatment using amalgam and ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer . A total of 364 amalgam restorations and 386 ART restorations were placed by three pedodontists in 126 and 158 children , respectively , and were evaluated after 0.5 , 1 , and 2 years . Restorations were placed in vital primary molars with neither pain nor signs of pulp involvement . The survival analysis was conducted using the proportional hazard rate regression model with frailty correction . Results The 2-year cumulative survival rates for all amalgam ( 77.3 % ) and ART ( 73.5 % ) restorations were not statistically significantly different , but there was an effect of “ type of surface ” ( single/multiple ) and “ cavity filling time ” on the survival rates . Both amalgam and ART single-surface restorations had higher survival rates than multiple-surface restorations of the same material . Secondary caries was responsible for 36 and 38 % of failures in amalgam and ART restorations , respectively . Mean time for restoring all type of cavities with amalgam and ART restorations was 13.6 and 13.7 min , respectively . Conclusions Amalgam and ART restorations presented similar survival rates over a 2-year period for all , single-surface , and multiple-surface restorations . Clinical relevance In the cause of finding alternatives to amalgam , ART restorations using high-viscosity glass ionomer might be a suitable option for managing cavitated dentine carious lesions in vital primary molars OBJECTIVES The Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) approach was compared with the traditional amalgam ( TA ) approach in order to test their appropriateness to complement a preventive and educational school oral health programme in Syria . METHODS Using a parallel group design , 370 and 311 grade 2 children were r and omly assigned to the ART and the TA group respectively . Eight dentists placed 1117  single- and multiple-surface restorations .  A modified actuarial method was used to estimate survival curves . The jackknife method was applied to calculate the st and ard error in the cumulative survival percentages . RESULTS A statistically significant difference in cumulative survival percentages between single-surface non-occlusal ART and comparable amalgam restorations was observed after 4.3 , 5.3 and 6.3 years . The survival of single-surface non-occlusal  ART  posterior restorations ( 80.2 + /- 4.9 % ) was statistically significantly higher than that of occlusal posterior ART restorations ( 64.8 + /- 3.9 % ) at evaluation year 6.3 . There was no statistically significant difference observed between survival percentages of large ( 55.8 + /- 10 % ) and that of small ( 69.2 + /- 4.6 % ) single-surface posterior ART restorations after 6.3 years . There was an operator effect observed for single-surface ART and comparable amalgam restorations . Secondary caries was observed in 2.3 % of single-surface ART restorations and in 3.7 % of single-surface amalgam restorations during the 6.3 year observation period . CONCLUSIONS The ART approach provided higher survival percentages for single-surface restorations than the TA approach over 6.3 years and is therefore appropriate for use in school oral health programmes . Secondary caries was only a minor reason for ART restorations to fail . An operator effect was observed for both treatment approaches OBJECTIVES To assess and compare the cumulative survival rate of amalgam and atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) restorations in primary molars over 3 years . METHODS 280 children aged 6 - 7 years old were enrolled in a cluster r and omized controlled clinical trial using a parallel group design covering two treatment groups : conventional restorative treatment with amalgam ( CRT ) and atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) using a high-viscosity glass-ionomer ( HVGIC ) Ketac Molar Easymix . Three pedodontists placed 750 restorations ( 364 amalgam and 386 ART in 126 and 154 children , respectively ) which were evaluated at 0.5 , 1 , 2 and 3 years . The proportional hazard rate regression model with frailty correction , ANOVA and Wald tests , and the Jackknife procedure were applied in analysing the data . RESULTS The cumulative survival rates over 3 years for all , single- and multiple-surface CRT/amalgam restorations ( 72.6 % , 93.4 % , 64.7 % , respectively ) were no different from those of comparable ART/HVGIC restorations ( 66.8 % ; 90.1 % and 56.4 % , respectively ) ( p=0.10 ) . Single-surface restorations had higher survival rates than multiple-surface restorations for the both treatment procedures ( p<0.0001 ) . A higher proportion of restorations failed because of mechanical reasons ( 94.8 % ) than of secondary caries ( 5.2 % ) . No difference in reasons for restoration failures between all types of amalgam and ART/HVGIC restorations were observed ( p=0.24 ) . SIGNIFICANCE The high-viscosity glass-ionomer used in this study in conjunction with the ART is a viable option for restoring carious dentin lesions in single surfaces in vital primary molars BACKGROUND The authors undertook a study to evaluate the effect of two cavity preparation methods on the initial survival of two more-viscous glass ionomer cements , or GICs , placed in the occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth . METHODS Three dentists placed 149 restorations in 68 adult patients in a hospital clinic . They used either atraumatic restorative treatment , or ART , or conventional cavity preparation methods to place two encapsulated esthetic conventional GICs : Fuji IX GP ( GC International Corp. , Tokyo ) and Ketac-Molar Aplicap ( 3 M ESPE , Seefeld , Germany ) . For comparison , they used high-copper-content GK Amalgam Alloy ( Advanced Technology & Material s Co. Ltd. , Beijing ) in conventional preparations . They evaluated the restorations using both direct and indirect observation methods . RESULTS Cavity preparations for which the authors used ART h and instruments took approximately twice as long to complete as did those for which they used conventional rotary instruments . After 12 months , no restorations had failed , but restorations comprising both GICs showed early losses of adjacent sealant material . Both GICs also showed relatively high restoration wear . At 12 months , the mean cumulative net occlusal wear for Fuji IX GP was 77 + /- 47 micrometers , and for Ketac-Molar 83 + /- 51 microm , without statistical significance ( P > .05 ) . Color matching improved significantly with time ( P < .001 ) , without significant differences in color between the two GICs by 12 months ( P = .09 ) . The amalgam alloy had minor surface tarnishing and marginal discrepancies increased with time ( P < .00 1 ) . CONCLUSIONS All of the occlusal restorations were rated as satisfactory after 12 months . The method of cavity preparation did not affect the restoration performance of the GICs . However , their deterioration requires long-term monitoring . Clinical Implication s. The more viscous GICs appear initially suitable for restricted use in clinical practice when placed using either of two cavity preparation methods in the occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth in adults OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to compare the success rates of  glass-ionomer cement restorations placed with the atraumatic restorative treatment approach and conventional cavity preparation methods . METHOD AND MATERIAL S Two encapsulated , high-strength , esthetic conventional glass-ionomer cements were placed in 82 Class I and 53 Class II atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional cavity preparations  , and an encapsulated amalgam alloy was placed in 32 Class I conventional preparations , in vital primary molars of 60 Chinese children aged 7 to 9 years . RESULTS The atraumatic restorative treatment preparations , made with h and instruments only , took approximately 50 % longer to complete than did the preparations completed with conventional rotary instrumentation . After 1 year , there were no amalgam failures . For the glass-ionomer cement restorations , when the atraumatic restorative treatment method was used , significantly better survival rates were found for Class I ( 92.9 % ) than for Class II ( 64.7 % ) cavity preparations . There was also a strong trend for relatively better survival rates for the conventional cavity preparation method ( 86.7 % ) than for the atraumatic restorative treatment ( 64.7 % ) method for Class II cavity preparations . However , both the atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional methods appeared equally effective for Class I preparations . CONCLUSION In a clinic setting , the use of atraumatic restorative treatment h and instruments for cavity preparation is more time consuming , and the method may also provide less mechanical retention and /or bulk of glass-ionomer cement for some Class II preparations in primary molars than does the use of conventional rotary instruments The present study was aim ed at comparing the effectiveness of three minimally invasive restorative treatment approaches for dentinal lesions in occlusal surfaces . The approaches tested comprised a conventional and a modified – conventional treatment and a modified Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) . The conventional approach was performed in a university dental clinic whilst the modified – conventional , employing portable equipment , and the modified ART , using h and instruments and a caries removal solution ( Caridex ® ) , were carried out in the field . Using the split – mouth design , 430 matched contralateral pairs of occlusal cavities were restored with amalgam or glass – ionomers in permanent molars of 152 school children by one dental therapist . The restorations were assessed using a modified USPHS – Ryge criteria . After 2 years , the cumulative survival percentages for occlusal amalgam and glass – ionomer restorations were 92 and 96 % , respectively . The survival of all restorations in the conventional , modified – conventional and the modified ART group was 96 , 96 and 91 % , respectively . The survival of occlusal amalgam and glass – ionomer restorations per treatment group was as follows : 94 and 99 % , respectively ( conventional group ) ; 95 and 97 % , respectively ( modified – conventional group ) , and 89 and 93 % , respectively ( modified ART group ) . The differences in survival percentage between restorations with amalgam and glass – ionomer , and between the three restorative treatment approaches were not statistically significant . In countries facing scarcity in re sources for dental care , ART seems a promising restorative approach to occlusal caries in posterior teeth . However , a longer clinical observation period is required to substantiate this initial conclusion UNLABELLED Several recent studies have demonstrated the success of the ART ( atraumatic restorative treatment ) technique under field conditions in developing countries . The ART technique involves removal of caries using only h and instruments , and placing a glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) restoration . OBJECTIVES To estimate the longevity of Fuji II GIC ART restorations placed in permanent teeth by dental nurse students under field conditions in rural Cambodia . DESIGN Clinical field trial . SETTING One high school in rural Cambodia . SAMPLE AND METHODS 53 subjects between the ages of 12 and 17 who had dental caries were selected to participate . Subjects were r and omly assigned to a dental nurse student for cavity preparation and placement of ART restorations ( without cavity conditioning ) . RESULTS 92.1 % of the carious lesions required class I or class V restorations , and 85.4 % were in the lower molars . 89 teeth were filled . At 1 and 3 years 86.4 % and 79.5 % of restorations were still present . Restorations were assessed by one dentist according to st and ard criteria . 76.3 % of the restorations were judged to be successful at 1 year , and 57.9 % at 3 years . CONCLUSIONS Factors which may have affected the success rates included : the material used , technical factors , failure to condition the cavity prior to restoration , and inexperience of the operators . The results suggest that ART restorations in permanent teeth using Fuji II GIC are only moderately successful after 3 years . Better results could be expected by using a dentine conditioner in conjunction with one of the newer stronger glass ionomer cements OBJECTIVES The objectives of this study were : to provide restorations using the ART approach to pre-school children in Southern China in a kindergarten environment , using a high-strength glass-ionomer restorative material ; to assess the acceptability of this approach and to evaluate on a longitudinal basis the restorations placed . SAMPLE AND METHODS A total of 170 ART restorations were placed in 95 children , aged 5.1 + /- 0.7 years , by seven final-year dental students using st and ard ART procedures and h and instruments . The restorations were evaluated every six months thereafter by two calibrated independent examiners using explorers and mouth-mirrors . RESULTS 93 % of the children reported that they did not feel pain during treatment and 86 % were willing to receive ART restorations again . The cumulative 12- and 30-month survival rates of Class I restorations were 91 % and 79 % , respectively . The corresponding figures for Class V restorations were 79 % and 70 % , while those for Class II restorations were 75 % and 51 % . The failure rates of Class III and IV restorations were high with more than half of them scored as missing within the first year . CONCLUSIONS The ART approach was shown to be acceptable to Chinese pre-school children for providing restorative dental care outside the traditional clinical setting . The success rates were high for Class I and V restorations in primary teeth , modest for Class II , and low for Class III and IV restorations This study compared the survival of restorations produced through the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach using glass-ionomer with those produced through the traditional approach using amalgam ( MTA ) in deciduous dentitions over a period of 3 years . Using a parallel group design , 835 grade 1 children , aged 6–7 years , participated . A total of 482 children were treated through the ART and 353 children through the MTA approach .  Eight dentists produced a total of 1,891 single- and multiple-surface restorations . After 3 years , 22.1 % of the restorations were lost for evaluation . There was a statistically significant difference in the combined survival of all single- and multiple-surface restorations between the two approaches in favour of the ART approach ( p = 0.04 ) . The study revealed a 3-year cumulative survival percentage of single-surface ART and MTA restorations of 86.1 and 79.6 % , respectively . The difference was statistically significant ( p = 0.03 ) . The main reasons for both single-surface ART and MTA restorations to fail was ‘ restoration missing ’ followed by ‘ gross marginal defect ’ . The 3-year cumulative survival percentages of multiple-surface ART and MTA restorations were 48.7 and 42.9 % , respectively . The difference was not statistically significant ( p > 0.05 ) . The 3-year survival percentages of single- and multiple- surface ART and MTA restorations varied widely amongst the 8 operators with an operator effect ( p = 0.001 ) for multiple-surface MTA restorations . It can be concluded that the ART approach using glass-ionomer yielded better results in treating dentinal lesions in deciduous teeth than did the traditional approach using amalgam after 3 years . It is recommended to select the ART approach to complement the other activities of the school oral health programme OBJECTIVE This study compares the quality of class I restorations  made with the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) technique and conventional class I amalgam restorations . METHODS The study was carried out among secondary school students in Mzuzu , Malawi . First-year students in 1987 who needed at least two class I restorations were selected . Based on a split-mouth design , each participant received both ART and conventional restorations . The 89 pairs of class I cavities were divided r and omly into two groups , since two different cermet ionomer cement ( CIC ) filling material s were used . Impressions of the restorations and subsequent models were made shortly after restoration , after six months , one year , two years , and three years . The quality of the restorations was determined on the models following the US Public Health Service criteria . Bulk fracture , contour , marginal integrity , and surface texture of the restorations were recorded and evaluated separately . Survival rates were determined by the result ant score of all criteria . RESULTS Though conventional amalgam restorations performed better on all criteria , this difference was significant only for the contour criterion . The survival rates of ART restorations after three years ( 81.0 % ) were lower than those of amalgam restorations ( 90.4 % ) ( P=.067 ) . CONCLUSIONS The quality of ART class I restorations is competitive with that of conventional amalgam restorations The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) restorations comparing two minimally invasive methods in permanent teeth after 12 months . Fifty pregnant women ( second trimester of pregnancy ) , mean age 22 ± 5.30 years , were treated by two previously trained operators . The treatment approaches tested were : chemomechanical method ( CarisolvTM ; MediTeam ) and atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) . A split-mouth study design was used in which the two treatments were r and omly placed in 50 matched pairs of permanent teeth . The chemomechanical method ( CM ) was the test group and the ART was the control group . The treatments were performed in Public Health Centers . The tested restorative material was a high-strength GIC ( Ketac Molar ; 3M/ESPE ) . The restorations were placed according to the ART guidelines . Two calibrated independent examiners evaluated the restorations in accordance with ART criteria . The interexaminer kappa was 0.97 . Data were analyzed using 95 % confidence interval on the binomial distribution and Fisher 's exact test at 5 % significance level . In a 12-month follow-up , 86 % of the restorations were evaluated . In the test group ( CM ) , 100 % ( CI=93.3 - 100 % ) of the restorations were considered successful . In the control group ( ART ) 97.6 % ( CI=87.4 - 99.9 % ) of the restorations were considered successful and 2.4 % unsuccessful ( marginal defect > 0.5 mm ) . There was no statistically significant difference between the 12-mounth success rate for both groups ( Fisher 's exact test : P=0.49 ) and between the two operators ( Fisher 's exact test : P=1.00 ) . Both minimally invasive methods , chemomechanical method and ART , showed a similar clinical performance after 12 months of follow up Objective : The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a new glass ionomer filling material ( ChemFlex ™ ) using the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach in class I cavities in the permanent dentition of Latvian schoolchildren . Methods : A total of 63 fillings ( 40 test and 23 control ) were placed using the ART technique in 41 schoolchildren in Riga at the Stomatology Institute of the Medical Academy of Latvia . These fillings were then blindly assessed after 2 years . Results : The complete success rate for both the test and the control material fillings were 92.5 and 94.9 % , respectively . Conclusion : The new glass ionomer filling has shown a good performance in terms of retention , marginal failure and fractures in class I cavities Successful use of atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) in children has been reported , but little information is available regarding its use in older adults . The hypothesis of this study was that survival rates of root restorations placed by both ART and the conventional technique were similar . Root-surface caries lesions in 103 institutionalized elders in Hong Kong were treated r and omly by either : ( 1 ) the conventional approach — caries removed by dental burs , and the cavity filled with light-cured resin-modified glass ionomer ; or ( 2 ) the ART approach — caries removed by h and instruments , and the cavity filled with chemically cured high-strength glass ionomer . In total , 84 conventional and 78 ART restorations were placed . After 12 months , 63 conventional and 59 ART restorations were review ed , and the respective 12-month survival rates were 91.7 % and 87.0 % ( p > 0.05 ) . It is concluded that the survival rates of both types of root restorations were high and similar The aim of this study was to obtain information on the restorative dental care of adults in Finl and . A r and om sample of private dentists was drawn from the register , and in spring 2000 they were sent a question naire requesting them to record information for each restoration placed during one ordinary working day . A total of 800 dentists were contacted and 548 responded . The dentists reported placement of 3,455 restorations .  Of these , 5 % were Class I , 36 % were Class II , 13 % were Class III , 9 % were Class IV , 21 % were Class V , and 16 % were extensive restorations including 4 or more surfaces . Overall , composite resin was the most common restorative material , and it was used in 79 % of the restorations , whereas amalgam was used in 5 % , compomers in 4 % , and glass ionomers ( either conventional or resin‐modified ) in 7 % of cases . In 5 % of the cases , the tooth was restored with indirect restorative methods , using either gold or ceramic material s. Of the treatments , 65 % were replacements of previous restorations . Secondary caries was the most common reason for replacement ( 36 % , 52 % , and 41 % for composite , glass ionomer , and amalgam , respectively ) . Other common reasons were fractures of the tooth or restoration ( 23 % , 11 % , and 22 % for composite , glass ionomer , and amalgam , respectively ) and lost composite restorations ( 16 % ) . The median age of failed restorations was 15 years for amalgam , 6 years for composite , and 7 years for conventional glass ionomer . Although the longevity of tooth coloured restorations was shorter than that of amalgam , comparisons with our previous studies indicate improved survival periods for tooth coloured material OBJECTIVE To compare survival rates of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) restorations placed with and without conditioners in occlusal cariouspermanent teeth after two years . MATERIAL AND METHODS The study was an experimental study among children , mean age 13.1 + /- 3.0 years . Two types of ART restorations  were r and omly placed on 186 occlusal carious permanent teeth on contralateral sides using split mouth design . Ethical clearance to conduct the study was obtained from the UI/UCH Review Committee . ART was performed using GC Fuji IX GP and teeth that were conditioned with GC Dentine Conditioner .  Time taken to place restorations and average material cost were recorded . Follow-up of subjects to evaluate integrity of restorations was conducted at 6 monthly intervals by one independent examiner . Proportions and percentages were generated ; student t-test was used to compare means . Cumulative survival rates were determined by the coded scores and st and ard criteria for evaluating ART restorations . RESULTS There was no significant difference in the mean time for placing ART restorations  with or without conditioners and in the cumulative survival rates of both treatment types after 2 years ( p > 0.05 ) . CONCLUSION ART restorations placed without tooth conditioners can achieve similar result as those placed with conditioners OBJECTIVE To compare the level of pain among children treated according to the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) and the Conventional Restorative Treatment ( CRT ) .  STUDY DESIGN Forty children of both genders , 4- to 7-years old , presenting Class I cavitated dentin lesions in primary molars were r and omly allocated to 2 groups . One group ( CRT ) received conventional restorative treatment using rotary instruments , while in the other one ( ART ) h and instruments were used to perform the restorations . All children were treated by the same operator A high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement ( Fuji IX ) was used to restore the teeth in both groups . Children 's pain was measured at the end of the first restorative treatment session using the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale ( dependent variable ) . Age , gender , treatment time and treatment group were independent variables . ANOVA and ANCOVA tests were used to analyze the data . RESULTS The CRT procedure took longer than the ART procedure ( p < 0.001 ) . Children from the ART group reported less pain than those from the CRT group ( p = 0.0037 ) . Four year olds reported more pain than 5- to 7-year olds ( p < 0.0001 ) in both groups . CONCLUSIONS Restorations placed using ART were less time consuming , children felt less pain when the ART approach was used , and younger children ( 4-years ) reported more pain than the older ones for both restorative treatments
Studies investigating restorations placed in the primary dentition showed no significant differences between the groups after 12 and 24 months .
In the permanent dentition , the longevity of ART restorations is equal to or greater than that of equivalent amalgam restorations for up to 6.3 years and is site-dependent .
No difference was observed in primary teeth .
The aim was to report on the longevity of  restorations placed using the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach  compared with that of  equivalent placed amalgam restorations .