Tedesco, Tamara Kerber, Innes, Nicola Patricia ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9984-0012, Gallegoz, Claudia Lopez, Seabra da Silva4, Gabriela, Gimenez, Thais, Braga, Mariana Minatel, Pinheiro de Araujo, Mariana, Jayaraman, Jayakumar, Al-yaseen, Waraf and Prócida Raggio, Daniela
2024.
Success rate of Hall Technique for restoring carious primary molars - Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Evidence-Based Dentistry
10.1038/s41432-024-01044-0
Item availability restricted. |
PDF
- Accepted Post-Print Version
Restricted to Repository staff only until 16 February 2025 due to copyright restrictions. Download (205kB) |
Abstract
Objectives The overall pooled success rate of the Hall Technique (HT) in various types of studies has not been investigated. The present study aims to evaluate the success rate of HT to restore carious primary molars. Methods A systematic search was carried out in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Scopus, Web of Science, and LIVIVO electronic databases, as well as the ProQuest database for grey literature review. A search was carried out up to September 2023 for studies meeting the eligibility criteria: Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs) and Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions (NRSIs); children with primary molars treated using HT; and reporting success for at least 1-month post-treatment. Single-arm meta-analysis assessed the pooled proportion (95% CI) of HT success rates. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach were assessed. Results Searching identified 665 studies, with 25 (15 RCTs and 10 NRSIs) meeting the eligibility criteria. In meta-analyses of RCTs, the pooled proportion success rate was 98% (95% CI: 97–99%) at 12-month follow-up. For NRSIs, the pooled proportion success rate was 95% (95% CI: 91–100%) up to 89 months. Conclusions HT presents a high success rate, even though the primary studies had “low” to “high” risk of bias and demonstrated “moderate” to “low” certainty of evidence. One of the main reasons for downgrading was related to blinding, which was generally unfeasible due to visibly different restorative materials. The systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021204415).
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Date Type: | Published Online |
Status: | In Press |
Schools: | Dentistry |
Publisher: | Springer Nature |
ISSN: | 1462-0049 |
Date of First Compliant Deposit: | 10 September 2024 |
Date of Acceptance: | 22 July 2024 |
Last Modified: | 08 Nov 2024 05:45 |
URI: | https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/171969 |
Actions (repository staff only)
Edit Item |