Evolution of the the ART approach: highlights and achievements

Abstract

Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) was initiated in the mid-eighties in Tanzania in response to an inappropriately functioning community oral health programme that was based on western health care models and western technology. The approach has evolved to its present standing as an effective minimal intervention approach mainly because the originators anticipated the great potential of ART to alleviate inequality in oral health care, and because they recognised the need to carry out research to investigate its effectiveness and applicability. Twenty-five years later, ART was accepted by the World Health Organisation (1994) and the FDI World Dental Federation (2002). It is included in textbooks on cariology, restorative dentistry and minimal intervention dentistry. It is being systematically introduced into public oral health service systems in a number of low- and middle income countries. Private practitioners use it. Many publications related to aspects of ART have been published and many more will follow. To achieve quality results with ART one has to attend well-conducted and sufficiently long training courses, preferably in combination with other caries preventive strategies. ART should, therefore, not be considered in isolation and must be part of an evidence-based approach to oral health with a strong foundation based on prevention.

The effect of GIC‐brand on the survival rate of proximal‐art restorations

“…The survival rates (SRs) of single‐surface or occlusal ART restorations using high‐viscosity glass–ionomer cements (GIC) in primary and permanent posterior teeth do not differ from the conventional restorations using amalgam. The SR of multi‐surface or proximal ART restorations, however, does not meet with the ADA specifications for quality restorations. The most frequent failures found for proximal ART restorations are loss of restoration and bulk fracture, generally attributed to the materials' properties.…”

“…Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) was developed for underserved communities to provide an alternative for preventing decayed teeth from being extracted 1 . For the past twenty years, ART has been one of the most researched minimal intervention approaches for caries management 2 .…”

“…The SR of multi-surface or proximal ART restorations, however, does not meet with the ADA specifications for quality restorations 1 . The most frequent failures found for proximal ART restorations are loss of restoration and bulk fracture, generally attributed to the materials' properties [8][9][10][11] .…”

Surface Hardness of Glass Ionomer Cements used in Atraumatic Restorative Treatment

“…ART is based on the use of manual instruments both for access and partial removal of carious tissue, normally making it unnecessary to use anesthesia [1,2]. It has low operating costs, dispensing the use of conventional dental equipment.…”

“…It has low operating costs, dispensing the use of conventional dental equipment. In this context, ART represents an excellent resource for extending access to treatment, diminishing costs and offering a large number of patients an improvement in oral health, since there is a repressed demand by persons who have never been to the dentist and require dental care [1][2][3].…”