Self-report of pain in children treated according to the atraumatic restorative treatment and the conventional restorative treatment--a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE To compare the level of pain among children treated according to the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) and the Conventional Restorative Treatment (CRT). STUDY DESIGN Forty children of both genders, 4- to 7-years old, presenting Class I cavitated dentin lesions in primary molars were randomly allocated to 2 groups. One group (CRT) received conventional restorative treatment using rotary instruments, while in the other one (ART) hand instruments were used to perform the restorations. All children were treated by the same operator A high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (Fuji IX) was used to restore the teeth in both groups. Children's pain was measured at the end of the first restorative treatment session using the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Rating Scale (dependent variable). Age, gender, treatment time and treatment group were independent variables. ANOVA and ANCOVA tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS The CRT procedure took longer than the ART procedure (p < 0.001). Children from the ART group reported less pain than those from the CRT group (p = 0.0037). Four year olds reported more pain than 5- to 7-year olds (p < 0.0001) in both groups. CONCLUSIONS Restorations placed using ART were less time consuming, children felt less pain when the ART approach was used, and younger children (4-years) reported more pain than the older ones for both restorative treatments.