Abstract
The purpose of this study is to compare atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) with the conventional rotational restorative method (CM) to determine in both cases the total time required for the procedure, the cost, the presence of pain, and the behavior of pediatric patients in Peru. Of the 30 children selected for the study, half received ART and restoration with glass ionomer cement and the other half, CM and restoration with amalgam. The study parameters were the times required to remove the decayed tissue and to complete the entire procedure, the total cost of the procedure, the presence of pain, and the patient's behavior during treatment. Significant differences were found between the two techniques in all parameters, except for the patient's behavior. Although removing the decayed tissue was faster with the CM, the entire procedure was faster with ART, which, moreover, was significantly less expensive and less painful than the CM. The results indicated that ART is a very good alternative due to its low cost and acceptance by the children.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal of Public Health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
