Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Dental Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lo, E.C.M.
Right arrow Articles by Corbet, E.F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lo, E.C.M.
Right arrow Articles by Corbet, E.F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Clinical

ART and Conventional Root Restorations in Elders after 12 Months

E.C.M. Lo*, Y. Luo, H.P. Tan, J.E. Dyson and E.F. Corbet

Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, 3/F, Prince Philip Dental Hospital, 34 Hospital Road, Hong Kong SAR, China

Correspondence: * corresponding author, edward-lo{at}hku.hk

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 randomly 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 hand 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 reviewed, 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.

Key Words: root caries • atraumatic restorative treatment • glass-ionomer cement • clinical trial • Chinese • age • restoration survival

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 85, No. 10, 929-932 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/154405910608501011
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of the American Dental AssociationHome page
G. J. Christensen
Restorative Dentistry for Times of Economic Distress
J Am Dent Assoc, February 1, 2009; 140(2): 239 - 242.
[Full Text] [PDF]