scholarly journals Cost and Time Differences between Three Types of Restorations for Primary Teeth: Amalgam, Composite and Glass-Ionomer Cement.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanthao Thi Phan ◽  
John M. Powers ◽  
Franklin Garcia-Godoy ◽  
Timothy Brown ◽  
Lilliam Marie Pinzon
Keyword(s):  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Costly Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: Early Childhood Caries is the most prevalent chronic disease among children in the United States. Three common approaches for treatment of dental caries in general population include: amalgam, composite, and glass ionomer. The purpose of this study was to measure the treatment cost differences for amalgam, composite, and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations of primary teeth and evaluate possible factors that could influence the cost of treatment. Methods: This cross-sectional study randomly selected data of 120 restorations from a clinical observational study of the restoration of primary teeth in children aged 5 – 10 years old. The 120 selected restorations in primary teeth, half with two surfaces and half with three surfaces, were performed by two operators at the Asian Health Center and Centro American Resources Center in California. Data were analyzed using multivariable linear regression. Results: Performing ART was found to take 7.8 minutes less than amalgam (p<0.01) and 19.0 minutes less than composite. ART was found to be 6.4% (p=0.01) less costly than amalgam and 62.4% (p<0.01) less costly than composite. Conclusions: ART was found to be the least costly treatment compared to amalgam and composite restoration procedures. ART also required the shortest time during the clinical procedure. Trial Registration: UCSF CHR Number: H55840-32823-02

scholarly journals In vitro and in vivo evaluations of glass-ionomer cement containing chlorhexidine for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 541-550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristiane Duque ◽  
Kelly Limi Aida ◽  
Jesse Augusto Pereira ◽  
Gláucia Schuindt Teixeira ◽  
Angela Scarparo Caldo-Teixeira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Ionomer Cement

scholarly journals Compressive and diametral tensile strength of glass ionomer cements

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 344-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Bresciani ◽  
Terezinha de Jesus Esteves Barata ◽  
Ticiane Cestari Fagundes ◽  
Akimi Adachi ◽  
Marina Martins Terrin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tensile Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Diametral Tensile Strength

The aim of this study was to compare, in different periods of time, the compressive and diametral tensile strength of a traditional high viscous glass ionomer cement: Fuji IX (GC Corporation), with two new Brazilian GIC's: Vitro-Molar (DFL) and Bioglass R (Biodinamica), all indicated for the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) technique. Fifteen disk specimens (6.0mm diameter x 3.0mm height) for the diametral tensile strength (DTS) test and fifteen cylindrical specimens (6.0mm diameter x 12.0mm height) for the compressive strength (CS) test were made of each GIC. Specimens were stored in deionized water at 37º C and 100% of humidity in a stove until testing. Five specimens of each GIC were submitted to CS and DTS test in each period, namely 1 hour, 24 hours and 7 days. The specimens were tested in a testing machine (Emic) at a crosshead speed of 1.0mm/min for CS and 0.5mm/min for the DTS test until failure occurred. The data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests (alpha=0.05). The mean CS values ranged from 42.03 to 155.47MPa and means DTS from 5.54 to 13.72 MPa, with test periods from 1h to 7 days. The CS and DTS tests showed no statistically significant difference between Fuji IX and Vitro Molar, except for CS test at 1-hour period. Bioglass R had lowest mean value for CS of the cements tested. In DTS test Bioglass R presented no statistically significant differences when compared with all others tested GICs at 1-hour period and Bioglass R presented no difference at 24-hour and 7-day periods when compared to Vitro-Molar. Further studies to investigate other physical properties such as fracture toughness and wear resistance, as well as chemical composition and biocompatibility, are now needed to better understand the properties of these new Brazilian GIC's.

Microscopic evaluation of rotatory and handle caries removal on glass ionomer cement/dentin interface

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Silvio José Mauro ◽  
Adriana Beatriz Silveira Pinto Fernandes ◽  
Fernando Yamamoto Chiba ◽  
Renato Herman Sundfeld ◽  
Suzely Adas Saliba Moimaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Microscopic Analysis ◽  
Conventional Technique ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Hybrid Layer ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Group I ◽  
Microscopic Evaluation ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Aim: This study evaluated the interface between glass ionomer cement (GIC) and dentin using the conventional and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) techniques for removal of decayed tissue. Materials and Methods: After preparation of the cavities by the conventional (Group I – GI) and ART (Group II – GII) techniques, the specimens were divided into 3 subgroups according to the GIC used (n=10). The conventional GIC KETAC FILL (3M/ESPE) was used in the groups GI-1 and GII-1, the conventional GIC VIDRION R (SS WHITE) in the groups GI-2 and GII-2, and the modified GIC FUJI II LC (GC Corporation) in the groups GI-3 and GII-3. For the microscopic analysis, the teeth were decalcified in a solution containing equal portions of 50% formic acid and 20% sodium citrate, dehydrated and submitted to paraffin baths. The samples were sectioned (6mm in thickness), stained by the Brown and Brenn method, and evaluated in a light microscope. Results: The microscopic analysis revealed interaction between the material and dentin structure only with the FUJI II LC. In addition, the behavior was superior for the conventional technique in comparison to the ART technique. Conclusion: It was concluded that the technique used for carious dentin removal does not seem to be determinant for the bonding of ionomeric materials to the dental structure, except for the resin-modified GIC in which the formed hybrid layer was higher using the conventional technique.

scholarly journals Reduction of dental fear and anxiety: the outlook of atraumatic restorative treatment

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 730
Author(s):  
Patricia Aleixo dos Santos Domingos ◽  
Livia Maria Prado Fonseca ◽  
Ana Luisa Botta Martins de Oliveira
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Carious Lesions ◽  
Patient Cooperation ◽  
Carious Process ◽  
Fear And Anxiety ◽  
Ionomer Cement

AIM: This study aimed to report a case in which the technique used was the atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) in patients with fear of conventional treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This procedure consisted in the treatment of carious lesions in the patient associated with the program of educational and preventive measures which the patient has undergone. The technique described here was performed on tooth 85, which presented atypical carious lesion cavity, through the removal of softened carious tissue with the use of hand instruments, without anesthesia and use of direct restorative material with fluoride release (glass ionomer cement). RESULTS: As a result of this technique, there was greater patient cooperation and decrease of anxiety initially revealed. CONCLUSION: Thus, it might be concluded that the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment is a technique already established that showed clinical effectiveness in controlling the evolution of the carious process and that being well indicated, was able to induce more cooperation from the patient, leading to the success of therapy restorer. The conventional glass ionomer cement showed excessive surface wear and therefore should not be used to restore atypical cavities.

scholarly journals Surface roughness of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART)

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Cristiane da Silva ◽  
Angela Cristina Cilense Zuanon
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopy Data ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Microscopy Data

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness of four conventional chemically cured glass ionomer cements (Fuji IX, Ketac Molar, Vidrion R and Vitromolar) commonly used in atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) immediately after material preparation. Twenty specimens of each glass ionomer cement were fabricated and surface roughness was measured after material setting. The specimens were further examined under scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed statistically by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney test at 5% significance level. Two-by-two comparisons showed statistically significant difference (p<0.05) between all materials, except for Ketac Molar and Vidrion R, which had statically similar results (p>0.05). Regarding their results of surface roughness, the materials can be presented in a crescent order, as follows: Ketac Molar < Vidrion R < Fuji IX < Vitromolar. In conclusion, from the tested glass ionomer cements, Fuji IX, Ketac Molar and Vidrion R presented acceptable surface roughness after setting reaction while Vitromolar showed remarkably higher surface roughness.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the relationship between the cost and properties of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Flávia Bissoto CALVO ◽  
Ariane KICUTI ◽  
Tamara Kerber TEDESCO ◽  
Mariana Minatel BRAGA ◽  
Daniela Prócida RAGGIO
Keyword(s):  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Relationship

scholarly journals Atraumatic restorative treatment and glass ionomer sealants in Tunisian children:survival after 3 years

2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 315-323
Author(s):  
A. Abid ◽  
F. Chkir ◽  
K. Ben Salem ◽  
K. Argoubi ◽  
M. Sfar Gandoura
Keyword(s):  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Permanent Teeth ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Loss To Follow Up ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Surface Sealants ◽  
Initial Survey

We evaluated the survival rates of atraumatic restorative treatment restorations and of glass ionomer sealants after 3 years of usage in primary and permanent teeth in Tunisian children aged 3-15 years attending rural schools, and assessed the presence or absence of dental caries in the restored teeth. After an initial survey of 1949 children, 242 were selected and agreed to undergo treatment. The loss to follow-up after 3 years was about 40%. Of those evaluated, 45.73% of one-surface ART restorations in permanent teeth had survived, 54.96% of one-surface sealants in permanent teeth had survived and 27.85% of one-surface ART restorations in primary teeth had survived. Caries was found in only 19 teeth after 3 years.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document