Primary Dental Caries Clinical Trial
Official title:
Evaluation of Hall Technique and Atraumatic Restorative Treatment for Management of Caries in the Primary Dentition (A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial)
Verified date | November 2020 |
Source | University of Alexandria |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
The aim of the present study is to evaluate both Hall technique and atraumatic restorative technique in comparison to the conventional restorative technique in the management of carious lesions in primary molars.
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 155 |
Est. completion date | August 30, 2020 |
Est. primary completion date | November 29, 2019 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 4 Years to 8 Years |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Children free of any systemic disease or special health care needs. - Cooperative children ( positive/ definitely positive) according to Frankl's behavior rating scale. - Children who are willing to participate in the study - Tooth inclusion criteria: - Primary molar teeth with occlusal or occlusoproximal carious lesions into dentin (International Caries Detection and Assessment System) (ICDAS) codes: 3-5 - Absence of clinical signs or symptoms of irreversible pulpitis - Absence of fistula or abscess near the selected tooth clinically and radiographically - Absence of spontaneous pain - Absence of pulp exposure - Absence of pathological mobility by placing the points of a pair of tweezers in an occlusal fossa, and gently rocking the tooth bucco-lingually. Exclusion Criteria: - Clinical signs and symptoms of irreversible pulpilitis. - Tooth mobility - Spontaneous pain |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Egypt | Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University | Alexandria |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Nourhan M.Aly | Alexandria University |
Egypt,
Farag A, van der Sanden WJ, Abdelwahab H, Frencken JE. Survival of ART restorations assessed using selected FDI and modified ART restoration criteria. Clin Oral Investig. 2011 Jun;15(3):409-15. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0403-0. Epub 2010 Apr 7. — View Citation
Frencken JE, Holmgren CJ. Caries management through the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach and glass-ionomers: update 2013. Braz Oral Res. 2014;28:5-8. doi: 10.1590/S1806-83242013000600001. — View Citation
Frencken JE, Pilot T, Songpaisan Y, Phantumvanit P. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART): rationale, technique, and development. J Public Health Dent. 1996;56(3 Spec No):135-40; discussion 161-3. — View Citation
Gruythuysen RJ, van Strijp AJ, van Palestein Helderman WH, Frankenmolen FW. [Non-restorative treatment of cavities in temporary dentition: effective and child-friendly]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2011;155(42):A3489. Review. Dutch. — View Citation
Innes N, Evans D, Hall N. The Hall Technique for managing carious primary molars. Dent Update. 2009 Oct;36(8):472-4, 477-8. — View Citation
Innes N, Stewart M, Souster G, Evans D. The Hall Technique; retrospective case-note follow-up of 5-year RCT. Br Dent J. 2015 Oct 23;219(8):395-400. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.816. — View Citation
Innes NP, Evans DJ, Stirrups DR. The Hall Technique; a randomized controlled clinical trial of a novel method of managing carious primary molars in general dental practice: acceptability of the technique and outcomes at 23 months. BMC Oral Health. 2007 Dec 20;7:18. — View Citation
Innes NP, Stirrups DR, Evans DJ, Hall N, Leggate M. A novel technique using preformed metal crowns for managing carious primary molars in general practice - a retrospective analysis. Br Dent J. 2006 Apr 22;200(8):451-4; discussion 444. — View Citation
Santamaria RM, Innes NP, Machiulskiene V, Evans DJ, Alkilzy M, Splieth CH. Acceptability of different caries management methods for primary molars in a RCT. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2015 Jan;25(1):9-17. doi: 10.1111/ipd.12097. Epub 2014 Mar 7. — View Citation
Santamaria RM, Innes NP, Machiulskiene V, Evans DJ, Splieth CH. Caries management strategies for primary molars: 1-yr randomized control trial results. J Dent Res. 2014 Nov;93(11):1062-9. doi: 10.1177/0022034514550717. Epub 2014 Sep 12. — View Citation
van der Zee V, van Amerongen WE. Short communication: Influence of preformed metal crowns (Hall technique) on the occlusal vertical dimension in the primary dentition. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2010 Oct;11(5):225-7. — View Citation
* Note: There are 11 references in all — Click here to view all references
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques) | The presence of a satisfactory crown will be checked. Loss of the crown, perforated crown or restoration fracture are considered failures. | 1 week | |
Primary | Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques) | The presence of a satisfactory crown will be checked. Loss of the crown, perforated crown or restoration fracture are considered failures. | 1 month | |
Primary | Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques) | The presence of a satisfactory crown will be checked. Loss of the crown, perforated crown or restoration fracture are considered failures. | 6 months | |
Primary | Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques) | The presence of a satisfactory crown will be checked. Loss of the crown, perforated crown or restoration fracture are considered failures. | 12 months | |
Primary | Success of the atraumatic restorative technique | Scoring of the restoration between 0-9. 0: Present, satisfactory. 1: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of less than 0.5 mm. 2: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of 0.5 mm or more. 3: Present, fracture in restoration. 4: Present, fracture in tooth. 5: Present, overextension of approximal margin of 0.5 mm or more. 6: Not present, most or all of restoration missing. 7: Not present, other restorative treatment performed. 8: Not present, tooth is not present. 9: Unable to diagnose. Success scores are 0 and 1, while failure scores are 2-8. | 1 week | |
Primary | Success of the atraumatic restorative technique | Scoring of the restoration between 0-9. 0: Present, satisfactory. 1: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of less than 0.5 mm. 2: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of 0.5 mm or more. 3: Present, fracture in restoration. 4: Present, fracture in tooth. 5: Present, overextension of approximal margin of 0.5 mm or more. 6: Not present, most or all of restoration missing. 7: Not present, other restorative treatment performed. 8: Not present, tooth is not present. 9: Unable to diagnose. Success scores are 0 and 1, while failure scores are 2-8. | 1 month | |
Primary | Success of the atraumatic restorative technique | Scoring of the restoration between 0-9. 0: Present, satisfactory. 1: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of less than 0.5 mm. 2: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of 0.5 mm or more. 3: Present, fracture in restoration. 4: Present, fracture in tooth. 5: Present, overextension of approximal margin of 0.5 mm or more. 6: Not present, most or all of restoration missing. 7: Not present, other restorative treatment performed. 8: Not present, tooth is not present. 9: Unable to diagnose. Success scores are 0 and 1, while failure scores are 2-8. | 6 months | |
Primary | Success of the atraumatic restorative technique | Scoring of the restoration between 0-9. 0: Present, satisfactory. 1: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of less than 0.5 mm. 2: Present, slight deficiency at cavity margin of 0.5 mm or more. 3: Present, fracture in restoration. 4: Present, fracture in tooth. 5: Present, overextension of approximal margin of 0.5 mm or more. 6: Not present, most or all of restoration missing. 7: Not present, other restorative treatment performed. 8: Not present, tooth is not present. 9: Unable to diagnose. Success scores are 0 and 1, while failure scores are 2-8. | 12 months | |
Primary | Treatment (restoration) survival | ART restorations, Hall technique and conventional restorations will be scored as satisfactory will be considered "successful," while those presented minor and/or major failures will be considered as "failed." | 1 week | |
Primary | Treatment (restoration) survival | ART restorations, Hall technique and conventional restorations will be scored as satisfactory will be considered "successful," while those presented minor and/or major failures will be considered as "failed." | 1 month | |
Primary | Treatment (restoration) survival | ART restorations, Hall technique and conventional restorations will be scored as satisfactory will be considered "successful," while those presented minor and/or major failures will be considered as "failed." | 6 months | |
Primary | Treatment (restoration) survival | ART restorations, Hall technique and conventional restorations will be scored as satisfactory will be considered "successful," while those presented minor and/or major failures will be considered as "failed." | 12 months | |
Primary | Radiographic evaluation of the treatment | Digital postoperative periapical radiographs will be obtained using a paralleling device to allow for exact and reproducible alignment of the dental film and the X-ray tube at the different follow up intervals. Teeth will be considered radiographically successful if they showed no evidence of radicular radiolucency, internal or external root resorption or periodontal ligament space widening | 6 months | |
Primary | Radiographic evaluation of the treatment | Digital postoperative periapical radiographs will be obtained using a paralleling device to allow for exact and reproducible alignment of the dental film and the X-ray tube at the different follow up intervals. Teeth will be considered radiographically successful if they showed no evidence of radicular radiolucency, internal or external root resorption or periodontal ligament space widening | 12 months | |
Secondary | Child satisfaction | The patient's perception of the treatment was assessed by using a faces scale modified to represent satisfaction, indifference, or dissatisfaction . A few minutes will be spent before each procedure to establish rapport with the child and to obtain some notion of the child's understanding of the meaning of those schematic facial expressions. After treatment, the child will be instructed to choose the face that best represented how he/she felt during the procedure. | immediately after completion of the dental treatment procedures | |
Secondary | Assessment of oral cleanliness (plaque) | using plaque index of Sillness and Loe. 0: No plaque. 1: A film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin and adjacent area of the tooth. The plaque may be seen in situ only after application of disclosing solution or by using the probe on the tooth surface. 2: Moderate accumulation of soft deposits within the gingival pocket, or the tooth and gingival margin which can be seen by the naked eye. 3: Abundance of soft matter within the gingival pocket and/or on the tooth and gingival margin. | 1 week | |
Secondary | Assessment of oral cleanliness (plaque) | using plaque index of Sillness and Loe. 0: No plaque. 1: A film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin and adjacent area of the tooth. The plaque may be seen in situ only after application of disclosing solution or by using the probe on the tooth surface. 2: Moderate accumulation of soft deposits within the gingival pocket, or the tooth and gingival margin which can be seen by the naked eye. 3: Abundance of soft matter within the gingival pocket and/or on the tooth and gingival margin. | 1 month | |
Secondary | Assessment of oral cleanliness (plaque) | using plaque index of Sillness and Loe. 0: No plaque. 1: A film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin and adjacent area of the tooth. The plaque may be seen in situ only after application of disclosing solution or by using the probe on the tooth surface. 2: Moderate accumulation of soft deposits within the gingival pocket, or the tooth and gingival margin which can be seen by the naked eye. 3: Abundance of soft matter within the gingival pocket and/or on the tooth and gingival margin. | 6 months | |
Secondary | Assessment of oral cleanliness (plaque) | using plaque index of Sillness and Loe. 0: No plaque. 1: A film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin and adjacent area of the tooth. The plaque may be seen in situ only after application of disclosing solution or by using the probe on the tooth surface. 2: Moderate accumulation of soft deposits within the gingival pocket, or the tooth and gingival margin which can be seen by the naked eye. 3: Abundance of soft matter within the gingival pocket and/or on the tooth and gingival margin. | 12 months | |
Secondary | Assessment of the gingival condition | using gingival index of Loe and Sillness. 0: Normal gingival. 1: Mild inflammation; slight change in color and slight edema, no bleeding on probing. 2: Moderate inflammation; redness, edema, glazing and bleeding on probing. 3: Severe inflammation; marked redness, edema, ulcerations and tendency towards spontaneous bleeding. | 1 week | |
Secondary | Assessment of the gingival condition | using gingival index of Loe and Sillness. 0: Normal gingival. 1: Mild inflammation; slight change in color and slight edema, no bleeding on probing. 2: Moderate inflammation; redness, edema, glazing and bleeding on probing. 3: Severe inflammation; marked redness, edema, ulcerations and tendency towards spontaneous bleeding. | 1 month | |
Secondary | Assessment of the gingival condition | using gingival index of Loe and Sillness. 0: Normal gingival. 1: Mild inflammation; slight change in color and slight edema, no bleeding on probing. 2: Moderate inflammation; redness, edema, glazing and bleeding on probing. 3: Severe inflammation; marked redness, edema, ulcerations and tendency towards spontaneous bleeding. | 6 months | |
Secondary | Assessment of the gingival condition | using gingival index of Loe and Sillness. 0: Normal gingival. 1: Mild inflammation; slight change in color and slight edema, no bleeding on probing. 2: Moderate inflammation; redness, edema, glazing and bleeding on probing. 3: Severe inflammation; marked redness, edema, ulcerations and tendency towards spontaneous bleeding. | 12 months |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Active, not recruiting |
NCT03696498 -
Effects of Partical Excavation in One Versus Two Procedures of Primary Deep Caries (PAPRICA)
|
N/A |