Int Dent J. 2013 Dec;63(6):329-35. doi: 10.1111/idj.12054.
The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the conventional restorative treatment (CRT) and the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) protocols, in comparison with the ultra-conservative treatment (UCT) protocol, would increase the quality of life of children over a period of 1 year. Cavitated primary molars of 302 children 6-7 years of age were treated according to the CRT, ART and UCT protocols at the school compound. Children's parents completed the Brazilian version of the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (B-ECOHIS) at baseline and one year later. Paired t-test, Chi-square test and ANOVA were applied in analysing the data. Questionnaires from 277 and 160 children were collected at baseline and after 1 year, respectively. A statistically significant difference in B-ECOHIS scores over the 1-year period was found for domains 'child symptoms' (P = 0.03) and 'child psychology' (P = 0.02). Treatment protocols did not statistically significantly influence the changes in B-ECOHIS scores over the 1-year period (P = 0.78). It can be concluded that the UCT protocol was as good as the two restorative protocols. All treatment protocols were effective in reducing children's experience of pain, their sleeping problems and their irritability and/or frustration levels over the 1-year period.
与超保守治疗（UCT）方案相比，常规修复治疗（CRT）和微创修复治疗（ART）方案在 1 年内会提高儿童的生活质量。302 名 6-7 岁的儿童在学校接受了 CRT、ART 和 UCT 方案治疗。治疗前和治疗后 1 年，儿童家长完成了巴西版早期儿童口腔健康影响量表（B-ECOHIS）。采用配对 t 检验、卡方检验和方差分析对数据进行分析。基线和 1 年后分别收集了 277 名和 160 名儿童的问卷。在 1 年的时间里，B-ECOHIS 评分在“儿童症状”（P=0.03）和“儿童心理”（P=0.02）两个领域有显著差异。治疗方案在 1 年内对 B-ECOHIS 评分的变化没有统计学意义（P=0.78）。因此，可以得出结论，UCT 方案与两种修复方案一样有效。所有治疗方案在 1 年内均能有效减轻儿童的疼痛、睡眠问题以及易怒和/或挫败感。
