##article.abstract##
Objective: To compare survival rates of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) restorations placed with and without conditioners in occlusal carious permanent 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 randomly 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 standard 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.
Keywords: Atraumatic restorative treatment, conditioner, permanent teeth
Résumé
Pour comparer les taux de survie aux restaurations d’ART places avec ou sans conditionneurs sur les dents permanents occlusales cariées après deux ans. Cette étude expérimentale était conduite sur les enfants, d’une moyenne d’âge de 13.1±3.0ans. Deux types de restaurations des ART étaient placés au hasard sur 186 dents permanentes occlusales cariées sur les cotes latérales en utilisant le dessin de bouche ouverte ou divisée. La clairance éthique permettant de conduire cette étude était obtenue auprès de la comite éthique locale institutionnelle. ART était fait utilisant le GC Fuji IX GP et les dents étaient conditionnées avec le GC Dentine Conditionneur. Le temps mis pour placer les restaurations était de six mois, le coût moyen était enregistré et la suivie des sujets pour évaluer l’intégrité de restaurations. Les proportions et pourcentages étaient calculées; Le test d’analyse t-test était utilisé pour compare les moyennes. Les taux de survie cumulative étaient déterminés par les scores des codes et les critères standards pour évaluer les restaurations d’ART. Il n’y avait pas de différence significative entre le temps moyen de placement des restaurations d’ART avec ou sans conditionneurs et les taux cumulatifs de survie chez les deux groups après deux ans (pe”0.05). Les restaurations d’ART placées sans conditionneurs peuvent apporter des résultats semblables à ceux avec des conditionneurs.
Correspondence: Dr. Olusola Ibiyemi, Department of Periodontology and Community Dentistry, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria, E-mail: shola_ibiyemi@yahoo.com
##submission.citations##
Frencken JE, Pilot T, Songpaisan Y and Phantumvanit P. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) rationale, technique and development. J Public Health Dent. 1996; 56: 135–140.
Horowitz AM. Introduction to the symposium on minimal intervention techniques for caries. J Public Health Dent. 1996; 56(3 spec No): 133-134.
Joynt RB, Davis EL, Wieczkowski G Jr and Pierce L. Effect of dentinal pretreatment on bond strength between glass ionomer cement and dentine. Oper Dent. 1990; 15(5): 173-177.
Ekworapoj P, Sidhu SK and McCabe JF. Effect of surface conditioning on adhesion of Glass Ionomer Cement to Er, Cr: YSGG Laser-Irradiated Human Dentine. Photomedicine and Laser Surgery. 2007; 25(2): 118-123.
Frencken JE, Van‘t Hof MA, Van Amerongen WE and Holmgren CJ. Effectiveness of single-surface ART restorations in the permanent dentition: a meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2004; 83: 120-123.
Barkmeier WW and Cooley RL. Laboratory evaluation of adhesive systems. Oper Dent. 1992; Suppl 5: 50-61.
Akinmade AO and Nicholson JW. Review of Glass ionomer cements as adhesives. Part 1. Fundamental aspects and their clinical relevance. J. Mater. Science 1993; 4: 95-101.
Mount GJ. Glass Ionomer Cements: past, present and future. Oper Dent. 1994; 19: 82-90.
Tanumiharia M, Burrow ME, Cimmino A and Tyas MJ. The evaluation of four conditioners for glass ionomer cements using field emission scanning electron microscopy. J. Dent. 2001; 29(2): 131-138.
Gordon VV. Effect of conditioning times on resin-modified glass-ionomer bonding. Am J Dent. 2000; 13(1): 13-16.
Sudsangiam S and van Noort R. Do dentin bond strength tests serve a useful purpose. J Adhes Dent. 1999; 1(1): 57-67.
Perdigao J, Frankenberger R, Rosa BT and Breschi L. New trends in dentin/enamel adhesion. Am J Dent. 2000; 13(Spec No): 25D-30D.
Yassen G. One year survival of occlusal ART restorations in primary molars placed with and without cavity conditioner. J Dent Child (Chic). 2009; 76(2): 136-141.
Mandari GJ, Frencken JE and van’t Hof MA. Six year success rates of occlusal amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations placed using three minimal intervention approaches. Caries Res. 2003; 37(4): 246-253.
National and state provisional totals 2006 census. National Bureau of Statistics. www.nigerianstat.gov.ng.
World Health Organization Oral Health Surveys: Basic Methods, 3rd edn. Geneva, 1988.
Aderinokun GA. Low cost technology in dentistry. A new dental chair- The Rasano 1087. Odonto-stomatol Trop 1990; 84: 129-133.
Phantumvanit P, Songpaisan Y, Pilot T and Frencken J. E. A three-year community field trial in Thailand-survival of one-surface restorations in the permanent dentition. J Public Health Dent. 1996; 56: 141-145.
University of Groningen. Guidelines for protocols for clinical studies of the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART): Technique and Materials, The Netherlands: WHO collaborating centre for oral health services research, University of Groningen 1995.
Holmgren CJ and Frencken JE. Painting the future for ART: Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 1999; 27(6): 449-453.
Taifour D, Frencken JE, Beiruti N, van’t Hof MA and Truin GJ. Effectiveness of glass ionomer cement (ART) and amalgam restorations in the deciduous dentition: results after 3 years. Caries Res. 2002; Nov-Dec; 36(6): 437-444.
SPSS 1996 Statistical Package for Social Science Windows version 11. 1989-1996. Release 7.5 (Nov. 14 1996) standard version.
American Dental Association Clinical protocol guidelines for dentine and enamel adhesives. Council on Dental Materials, Instruments and Equipment. Restorative Materials Chicago ADA 1991.
Mjor IA and Gordon VV. A review of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). Int Dent J. 1999; 49: 127–131.
Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD, et al. Three-year survival of one-surface ART restorations and glass-ionomer sealants in a school oral health programme in Zimbabwe. Caries Res 1998; 32: 119–126.
Lo ECM and Holmgren CJ. Provision of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) restorations to chinese pre-school children – a 30-month evaluation. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2001; 11: 3-10.
Holmgren CJ, Lo EC, Hu DY and Wan H. ART restorations and sealants placed in chinese school children - after three years. Comm Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2000; 28(4): 314-320.
Lopez N, Simpser-Rafalin S and Berthold P. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment for prevention and treatment of caries in an underserved community. Am J Public Health. 2005; 95(8): 1338-1339.
Frencken JE, Songpaisan Y, Phantumvanit P and Pilot T. An Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique: evaluation after one year. Int Dent J. 1994; 44(5): 460-464.
Mickenautsch S, Munshi I and Grossman ES. Comparative cost of ART and conventional treatment within a dental school clinic. SADJ 2002; 57(2): 52-58.
Lo ECM, Luo Y, Fan MW et al. Clinical investigation of Two Glass ionomer Restoratives used with the Atraumatic Restorative Approach in China: Two-year Result. Caries Res. 2001; 35: 458-563.
Puttbasri W, Pitiphat W, Phantumvanit P, et al. Cost effectiveness analysis of using atraumatic restoration treatment (ART) technique compared to conventional amalgam treatment. J Dent Res 1998 77: 1354.
Mallow PK, Durward CS and Klaipo M. Restoration of permanent teeth in young rural children in Cambodia using the Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique and fuji II glass ionomer cement. Int J Paediatr Dent. 1998; 8(1): 35-40.
PAHO: Oral health of low income children. Procedures for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment. In Final Report Pan American Health Organization, Washington DC; 2006.
Yap UJ, Strokes AN and Pearson GJ. Concepts of adhesion-a review. N Z Dent J. 1994; 90(401): 91-97.
Buchalla W, Attin T and Hellwig E. Influence of dentin conditioning on bond strength of light-cured ionomer restorative materials and polyacid-modified composite resins. J Clin Dent. 1996; 7(4): 81-84.
Dijken JWV and Horstedt P. Effect of 5% sodium hypochlorite or Tubulicid pretreatment in vivo on the marginal adaptation of dental adhesives and glass ionomer cements. Dent Mater. 1987; 3(6): 303-306.
Wilson AD. Glass ionomer cement-origin, development and future. Clin Mater. 1991; 7(4): 275-282.
Hewlett ER, Caputo AA and Wrobel DC. Glass ionomer bond strength and treatment with polyacrylic acid. J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 66(6): 767-772.
Van Noort. Glass-ionomer cements and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements Introduction to dental materials, Mosby, Edinburgh, UK (2002) p. 129–130.
Tyas MJ and Burrow MF. Adhesive restorative materials: a review. Aust Dent J. 2004; 49(3): 112 - 121; quiz 154.
Davis EL, Wieczkowski G Jr, Yu XY, Joynt RB and Gallo J. Adhesion of dentin bonding agents after smear layer treatments. Am J Dent. 1992; 5(1): 29-32.
Al-Nahedh H and Ateyah NZ. Effect of different bonding conditions on the shear bond strength of two compomers to bovine dentin. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2006; 1(4): 9-16.
Tanumiharia M, Burrow MF and Tyas MJ. Microtensile strengths of glass ionomer (polyalkenoate) cements to dentine using four conditioners. J Dent. 2000; 28(5): 361-366.
Mandari GJ, Truin GJ, van’t Hof MA and Frencken JE. Effectiveness of three minimal intervention approaches for managing dental caries: survival of restorations after 2 years. Caries Res. 2001; 35(2): 90-94.
Taifour D, Frencken JE, Beiruti N, van’t Hof MA, Truin GJ and van Palenstein Helderman WH. Comparison between restorations in the permanent dentition produced by hand and rotary instrumentation – survival after 3 years. Comm. Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2003; 31: 122–128.
Frencken JE, van’t Hof MA, Taifour D andAl-Zaher I. Effectiveness of ART and traditional amalgam approach in restoring single surface cavities in posterior teeth of permanent dentitions in school children after 6 years. Comm Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2007; 35: 207–214.