Atraumatic primary molar restorations by mobile dental service, Samchuk District, Suphanburi: 6 month evaluation

Main Article Content

ณัฐกาญจน์ ภาคยวงศ์

Abstract

This analytical study evaluated primary molar restorations with Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) technic at 6 months by Samchuk mobile dental service. The glass ionomer      restored material existence and dental caries related restorations were examined by one single intra-calibrated examiner (kappa = 0.92) and an assistant recorded the codes after repeatable check.  Total 71 children 184 teeth received the service which 64 children could be followed up and 149 restorations were evaluated.  Completely existence of Class I and II restored material were 83.6 and 51.3 %, respectively while related dental caries were found 13.6 and 36.8 %, respectively. Overall effectiveness was 73.8 %, 81.8 % in Class I restorations higher than of which Class II (51.3 %) with statistically significant (p = 0.00).


 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
ภาคยวงศ์ ณ. Atraumatic primary molar restorations by mobile dental service, Samchuk District, Suphanburi: 6 month evaluation. Th Dent PH J [Internet]. 2017 Jun. 30 [cited 2024 May 26];22(1):27-36. Available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ThDPHJo/article/view/148539
Section
Original Article

References

1. Vania A, Parisella V, Capasso F, Di Tanna GL, Vestri A. Early childhood caries underweight or overweight, that is the question. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2011; 12(4):231-5.

2. Bhoomika W, Ramakrishna Y, Munshi AK. Relationship between severe early childhood caries and body mass index. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013; 37(3):235-42.

3.Robke FJ. Effects of nursing bottle misuse on oral health. Prevalence of caries, tooth malalignments and malocclusions in North-German preschool children. J Orofac Orthop 2008; 69(1):5-19. doi: 10.1007/s00056-008-0724-7.

4. Grund K, Goddon I, Schüler IM, Lehmann T, Heinrich-Weltzien R. Clinical consequences of untreated dental caries in German 5- and 8-year-olds. BMC Oral Health 2015; 15:140. doi: 10.1186/s12903-015-0121-8.

5. Finucane D. Rationale for restoration of carious primary teeth: a review. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2012; 13(6):281-92.

6. Barmes D. Foreword for Proceedings of the IADR symposium Minimal Intervention Technique for Dental Caries. J Public Health Dent 1996; 56:131. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1996.tb02420.x

7. Molina GF, Faulks D, Mazzola I, Mulder J, Frencken JE. One year survival of ART and conventional restorations in patients with disability. BMC Oral Health 2014; 7;14:49. doi: 10.1186/1472-6831-14-49.

8. Roshan NM, Sakeenabi B. Survival of occlusal ART restorations in primary molars placed in school environment and hospital dental setup-one year follow-up study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011; 16(7):e973-7. doi:10.4317/medoral.17327.

9. Frencken JE, Songpaisan Y, Phantumvanit P, Pilot T. An atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique: evaluation after one year. Int Dent J 1994; 44(5):460-4.

10. Lo EC, Luo Y, Fan MW, Wei SHY. Clinical investigation of two glass-ionomer restoratives used with the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment approach in China: Two-years results. Caries Res 2001; 35(6):458–463. doi:10.1159/000047490.

11. Lo EC, Holmgren CJ. Provision of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) restorations to Chinese pre-school children – a 30 month evaluation. Int J Paediatr Dent 2001; 11(1):3–10. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-263x.2001.00232.x.

12. Ersin NK, Candan U, Aykut A, Onçağ O, Eronat C, Kose T. A clinical evaluation of resin-based composite and glass ionomer cement restorations placed in primary teeth using the ART approach: results at 24 months. J Am Dent Assoc 2006; 137(11):1529-36.

13. van Gemert-Schriks MC, van Amerongen WE, ten Cate JM, Aartman IH. Three-year survival of single- and two-surface ART restorations in a high-caries child population. Clin Oral Investig 2007; 11(4):337-43. doi: 10.1007/s00784-007-0138-8.

14. Kemoli AM, van Amerongen WE. Influence of the cavity-size on the survival rate of proximal ART restorations in primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent 2009; 19(6):423-30.doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2009.01013.x.

15. Yassen G. One-year survival of occlusal ART restorations in primary molars placed with and without cavity conditioner. J Dent Child 2009; 76(2):136-41.

16. Abid A, Chkir F, Ben Salem K, Argoubi K, Sfar-Gandoura M. Atraumatic restorative treatment and glass ionomer sealants in Tunisian children: survival after 3 years. East Mediterr Health J 2002; 8(2-3):315-23.

17. da Franca C, Colares V, van Amerongen E. Two-year evaluation of the atraumatic restorative treatment approach in primary molars class I and II restorations. Int J Paediatr Dent 2011; 21:249-53. doi:10.1111/j. 1365-263X.2011.01125.x.

18. Bonifácio CC, Hesse D, Raggio DP, Bönecker M, van Loveren C. The effect of GIC-brand on the survival rate of proximal-ART restorations. Int J Paediatr Dent 2013; 23(4):251-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2012.01259.x.

19. de Amorim RG, Leal SC, Mulder J, Creugers NH, Frencken JE. Amalgam and ART restorations in children: a controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2014; 18(1):117-24. doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-0955-x.

20. Mijan M, de Amorim RG, Leal SC, Mulder J, Oliveira L. The 3.5-year survival rates of primary molars treated according to three treatment protocols: a controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18(4):1061-9. doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-1077-1.

21. Suphanburi Provincial Public Health Office. Dental status 2011: Suphanburi : Suphanburi Provincial Public Health Office; 2011. (in Thai)

22. Suphanburi Provincial Public Health Office. Dental status 2012: Suphanburi. 2012. (in Thai)

23. Suphanburi Provincial Public Health Office. Dental status 2013: Suphanburi. 2013. (in Thai)

24. Suphanburi Provincial Public Health Office. Dental status 2014: Suphanburi. 2014. (in Thai)

25. Suphanburi Provincial Public Health Office. Dental status 2015: Suphanburi. 2015. (in Thai)

26. Dental Health Bureau. The 7th National Oral Health Survey 2012 of Thailand. Bangkok: Department of Health; 2013. (in Thai)

27. Frencken JE, Pilot T, Songpaisan Y, Phantumvanit P. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART): rationale, technique, and development. J Public Health Dent 1996; 56(3):135-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1996.tb02423.x.

28. Taifour D, Frencken JE, Beiruti N, van 't Hof MA, Truin GJ. Effectiveness of glass-ionomer (ART) and amalgam restorations in the deciduous dentition – results after 3 years. Caries Res. 2002;36:437–444. doi:10.1159/000066531.

29.Hermosillo VH, Quintero LE, Guerrero ND, Suárez DD, Hernández MJ. The implementation and preliminary evaluation of an ART strategy in Mexico: a country example. J Appl Oral Sci 2009; 17:114-21.

30. Carvalho TS, Sampaio FC, Diniz A, Bönecker M, Van Amerongen WE. Two years survival rate of Class II ART restorations in primary molars using two ways to avoid saliva contamination. Int J Paediatr Dent 2010;20(6):419-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2010.01060.x.

31. Holmgren CJ, Lo EC, Hu D, Wan H. ART restorations and sealants placed in Chinese school children-results after three years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2000; 28(4):314-20. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0528. 2000.280410.x.

32. de Amorim RG, Leal SC, Frencken JE. Survival of ART sealants and ART restorations: a meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16(2): 429-441. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0513-3.

33. Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD. ART restorations and glass ionomer sealants in Zimbabwe: survival after 3 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1998; 26(6):372-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1998.tb01975.x.

34. Jordan RA, Gaengler P, Markovic L, Zimmer S. Performance of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) depending on operator-experience. J Public Health Dent 2010; 70(3):176-80.doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2009.00159.x.

35. Nomoto R, Komoriyama M, McCabe JF, Hirano S. Effect of mixing method on the porosity of encapsulated glass ionomer cement. Dent Mater 2004; 20(10):972-8. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2004.03.001.