Regarding pain , there was a trend for treatments without rotary instruments and local anesthesia to be less frequently reported as painful .
No statistical difference was found intragroup nor among treatments for OHRQoL. CONCLUSIONS Anxiety and pain are directly related with more invasive restorative treatments .
On the other h and , quality of life is not improved regardless of the restorative technique used .
BACKGROUND Despite the increasing number of studies evaluating patient reported outcome measures ( PROs ) , there is no clearness regarding which restorative treatment offers major benefits based on the pediatric patient perspective .
AIM To compare different restorative techniques in pediatric dentistry regarding patient-reported outcomes .
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment compared to the Hall Technique for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Background In many parts of the world , school-age children have high dental treatment needs ; however , there is often low , or no , dental care provision . Although Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) was developed to address this , its survival rate in occluso-proximal lesions is low . An alternative , the Hall Technique ( HT ) has shown better relative outcomes for occluso-proximal lesions , but has not been directly compared to ART or tested in field setting s. This trial will compare ART and the HT for the most clinical ly- and cost-effective strategy for managing occluso-proximal lesions in primary molars , in a school setting , using low-technology and child-friendly dental techniques . Methods / Design This two-arm , parallel group , patient-r and omized controlled , superiority trial will have treatment provided in schools . Schoolchildren ( n = 124 , age 6–8 ) with at least one occluso-proximal carious primary molar lesion will have r and om allocation to treatment with ART or HT . Baseline measures and outcome data will be assessed through participant report , clinical examination and parent report/ question naires . The primary outcome is survival rate , a composite measure of absence of Minor Failures ( a defect in the restoration/crown , but not interfering with tooth health ) and Major Failures ( signs or symptoms of irreversible pulp damage , such as dental fistula/abscess , tooth fracture or failures that can not be repaired ) . Secondary outcomes are : ( 1 ) child-reported discomfort , ( 2 ) childrens ’ and ( 3 ) parents ’ concerns around dental appearance and ( 4 ) acceptability of treatments , ( 5 ) occlusal-vertical dimensions ( OVD ) changes , ( 6 ) plaque index , ( 7 ) gingival health , ( 8) decayed , missing , filled teeth in permanent teeth (DMFT)/decayed , missing , filled teeth in primary teeth ( dmft ) , ( 9 ) oral health-related- quality of life , reported by children and parents/caregivers , ( 10 ) the incremental cost-effectiveness , and ( 11 ) operator effect . A trained and calibrated examiner will evaluate the treated teeth after 1 week , then 1 , 6 , 12 , 24 and 36 months post treatment . Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression tests will be used to investigate the primary outcome . The Mann-Whitney or t test , Friedman test , paired t test or Wilcoxon test and Ordinal Logistic Regression Analysis will be used to analyze the secondary outcomes . Discussion The results of this trial will support decision-making by clinicians and policy-makers for managing occluso-proximal lesions in setting s with constrained re sources and limited dental access . Trial registration www . clinical trials.gov , NCT02569047 , registered 5 October 2015
Regarding pain , there was a trend for treatments without rotary instruments and local anesthesia to be less frequently reported as painful .
No statistical difference was found intragroup nor among treatments for OHRQoL. CONCLUSIONS Anxiety and pain are directly related with more invasive restorative treatments .
On the other h and , quality of life is not improved regardless of the restorative technique used .
BACKGROUND Despite the increasing number of studies evaluating patient reported outcome measures ( PROs ) , there is no clearness regarding which restorative treatment offers major benefits based on the pediatric patient perspective .
AIM To compare different restorative techniques in pediatric dentistry regarding patient-reported outcomes .