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.
Age range
4 Years – 8 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques)
Timeframe: 1 week
Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques)
Timeframe: 1 month
Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques)
Timeframe: 6 months
Success of the crown (for Hall and conventional techniques)
Timeframe: 12 months
Success of the atraumatic restorative technique
Timeframe: 1 week
Success of the atraumatic restorative technique
Timeframe: 1 month
Success of the atraumatic restorative technique
Timeframe: 6 months
Success of the atraumatic restorative technique
Timeframe: 12 months
Treatment (restoration) survival
Timeframe: 1 week
Treatment (restoration) survival
Timeframe: 1 month
Treatment (restoration) survival
Timeframe: 6 months
Treatment (restoration) survival
Timeframe: 12 months
Radiographic evaluation of the treatment
Timeframe: 6 months
Radiographic evaluation of the treatment
Timeframe: 12 months