| Abstrakt: |
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 randomly 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
