ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/204332 |
Resumo: | There are many glass ionomer cements available on the Brazilian market for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART), however, there is still a gap in the literature regarding their cost-effectiveness. Objectives: To evaluate the influence of restorative materials (Ketac Molar, 3M ESPE; and Vitro Molar, Nova DFL) in the two-year survival rate and cost-effectiveness of occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. Methodology: A total of 117 children (aged four to eight years) with at least one occluso-proximal carious lesion in primary molars were selected and randomly divided in treatment groups (KM or VM) in this parallel randomized controlled trial. Treatments followed ART premises and were conducted in public schools by trained operators in Barueri, Brazil. A trained, calibrated, and blinded examiner performed the evaluations after two, six, 12, and 24 months (k=0.92). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate restoration survival and Cox regression was used to test the association with clinical factors (α=5%). For cost analysis, material and professional costs were considered. Monte Carlo analysis was used to generate a cost-effectiveness plane and bootstrapping was used to compare material costs over the years. Results: The overall survival rate was 36.9% after two years (48.6% for KM and 25.4% for VM). Restorations with VM failed more than those with KM (HR=1.70; 95% CI=1.06–2.73; p=0.027). VM presented lower initial cost, but no difference was observed between groups considering the two-year incremental cost. Conclusion: After a two-year evaluation, KM proved to be a better option than VM for occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02267720 |
id |
USP-17_2544231242758374c85047743e708a0e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.usp.br:article/204332 |
network_acronym_str |
USP-17 |
network_name_str |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brandsAtraumatic Restorative TreatmentGlass ionomer cementClinical trialCost-effectivenessRestoration survival percentagePrimary teethPediatric dentistryThere are many glass ionomer cements available on the Brazilian market for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART), however, there is still a gap in the literature regarding their cost-effectiveness. Objectives: To evaluate the influence of restorative materials (Ketac Molar, 3M ESPE; and Vitro Molar, Nova DFL) in the two-year survival rate and cost-effectiveness of occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. Methodology: A total of 117 children (aged four to eight years) with at least one occluso-proximal carious lesion in primary molars were selected and randomly divided in treatment groups (KM or VM) in this parallel randomized controlled trial. Treatments followed ART premises and were conducted in public schools by trained operators in Barueri, Brazil. A trained, calibrated, and blinded examiner performed the evaluations after two, six, 12, and 24 months (k=0.92). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate restoration survival and Cox regression was used to test the association with clinical factors (α=5%). For cost analysis, material and professional costs were considered. Monte Carlo analysis was used to generate a cost-effectiveness plane and bootstrapping was used to compare material costs over the years. Results: The overall survival rate was 36.9% after two years (48.6% for KM and 25.4% for VM). Restorations with VM failed more than those with KM (HR=1.70; 95% CI=1.06–2.73; p=0.027). VM presented lower initial cost, but no difference was observed between groups considering the two-year incremental cost. Conclusion: After a two-year evaluation, KM proved to be a better option than VM for occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02267720Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru2022-11-10info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/20433210.1590/1678-7757-2022-0148Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 30 (2022); e20220148Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 30 (2022); e20220148Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 30 (2022); e202201481678-77651678-7757reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/204332/188011Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Applied Oral Sciencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessOlegário, Isabel CristinaFurlan, Anna Luiza de Brito PachecoLaux, Caroline MarianoHesse, DanielaBonifácio, Clarissa CalilImparato, José Carlos PettorossiRaggio, Daniela Prócida2022-11-10T13:00:49Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/204332Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/oai||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2022-11-10T13:00:49Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands |
title |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands |
spellingShingle |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands Olegário, Isabel Cristina Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Glass ionomer cement Clinical trial Cost-effectiveness Restoration survival percentage Primary teeth Pediatric dentistry |
title_short |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands |
title_full |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands |
title_fullStr |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands |
title_full_unstemmed |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands |
title_sort |
ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands |
author |
Olegário, Isabel Cristina |
author_facet |
Olegário, Isabel Cristina Furlan, Anna Luiza de Brito Pacheco Laux, Caroline Mariano Hesse, Daniela Bonifácio, Clarissa Calil Imparato, José Carlos Pettorossi Raggio, Daniela Prócida |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Furlan, Anna Luiza de Brito Pacheco Laux, Caroline Mariano Hesse, Daniela Bonifácio, Clarissa Calil Imparato, José Carlos Pettorossi Raggio, Daniela Prócida |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Olegário, Isabel Cristina Furlan, Anna Luiza de Brito Pacheco Laux, Caroline Mariano Hesse, Daniela Bonifácio, Clarissa Calil Imparato, José Carlos Pettorossi Raggio, Daniela Prócida |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Glass ionomer cement Clinical trial Cost-effectiveness Restoration survival percentage Primary teeth Pediatric dentistry |
topic |
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Glass ionomer cement Clinical trial Cost-effectiveness Restoration survival percentage Primary teeth Pediatric dentistry |
description |
There are many glass ionomer cements available on the Brazilian market for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART), however, there is still a gap in the literature regarding their cost-effectiveness. Objectives: To evaluate the influence of restorative materials (Ketac Molar, 3M ESPE; and Vitro Molar, Nova DFL) in the two-year survival rate and cost-effectiveness of occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. Methodology: A total of 117 children (aged four to eight years) with at least one occluso-proximal carious lesion in primary molars were selected and randomly divided in treatment groups (KM or VM) in this parallel randomized controlled trial. Treatments followed ART premises and were conducted in public schools by trained operators in Barueri, Brazil. A trained, calibrated, and blinded examiner performed the evaluations after two, six, 12, and 24 months (k=0.92). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate restoration survival and Cox regression was used to test the association with clinical factors (α=5%). For cost analysis, material and professional costs were considered. Monte Carlo analysis was used to generate a cost-effectiveness plane and bootstrapping was used to compare material costs over the years. Results: The overall survival rate was 36.9% after two years (48.6% for KM and 25.4% for VM). Restorations with VM failed more than those with KM (HR=1.70; 95% CI=1.06–2.73; p=0.027). VM presented lower initial cost, but no difference was observed between groups considering the two-year incremental cost. Conclusion: After a two-year evaluation, KM proved to be a better option than VM for occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02267720 |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-11-10 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/204332 10.1590/1678-7757-2022-0148 |
url |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/204332 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.1590/1678-7757-2022-0148 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/204332/188011 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Applied Oral Science http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Applied Oral Science http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 30 (2022); e20220148 Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 30 (2022); e20220148 Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 30 (2022); e20220148 1678-7765 1678-7757 reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online) instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
collection |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||jaos@usp.br |
_version_ |
1800221683295977472 |