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 .
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.
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
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 .