↓ Skip to main content

Acceptability, feasibility and perceived satisfaction of the use of the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment approach for people with disability

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acceptability, feasibility and perceived satisfaction of the use of the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment approach for people with disability
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2015.vol29.0097
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gustavo Fabián Molina, Denise Faulks, Joannes Frencken

Abstract

Unmet caries treatment need is prevalent among people with disability, partly due to difficulties cooperating with conventional dental treatment. This study compared Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) with conventional restorative treatment (CRT) in the clinic and under general anaesthesia (GA), in terms of feasibility, acceptability and respondent satisfaction in patients referred for special care dentistry. Patients referred for dental restorative care were treated using either ART or CRT approach. Acceptance, feasibility and level of satisfaction with the treatment provided were assessed. ANOVA with Bonferroni correction and Chi-square tests investigated differences in age, gender and Visual Analogue Scale satisfaction scores. A total of 66 patients (mean 13.6 ± 7.8 years) were included and 43 respondents chose ART. ART was feasible for 47 patients, with optimal placement of restorations for 79% of all patients receiving ART. CRT in the clinic was chosen by 15 respondents and was feasible for 5 (33%). Local anaesthesia was required for 4 of the 47 patients receiving ART and for 3 of the 5 patients receiving CRT in the clinic. Neither ART nor CRT could be performed in the clinic for 14 patients who were treated under GA (21%). Respondent satisfaction was higher for those receiving ART than CRT (in the clinic and under GA). It was concluded that ART is a satisfactory, feasible, acceptable and effective approach to restorative dental treatment in patients with disability who have difficulty coping with conventional treatment. More research is now required to confirm these results in a larger study population.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 85 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 19%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 28 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 45%
Psychology 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 31 36%