International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 5 ( September-October, 2019 ) > List of Articles


Effectiveness of Hall Technique for Primary Carious Molars: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Sheikh Bilal Badar, Sadia Tabassum, Farhan Raza Khan, Robia Ghafoor

Keywords : Deciduous carious molars, Hall technique, Metal crowns, Preformed metal crowns

Citation Information : Badar SB, Tabassum S, Khan FR, Ghafoor R. Effectiveness of Hall Technique for Primary Carious Molars: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019; 12 (5):445-452.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1666

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-10-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Aim: The objective of the present systematic review was to assess the outcomes of Hall technique (HT) on primary carious molars and compared it with the conventional dental restorations. Materials and methods: The systematic review was registered with Prospero registry (CRD42015020445) to answer the following research question: Is HT a better restorative option compared to other techniques for restoration of carious primary molars? In addition to exploring various health sciences databases, hand search was also done using following key terms in different permutations: (Hall technique OR Hall\'s technique OR preformed metal crown OR stainless steel crown) AND (caries OR carious molar OR deciduous tooth OR baby tooth OR milk tooth OR primary tooth). The outcome of interest was success of the restoration achieved with either method. Results: Five studies were included (two RCTs, one quasi-experimental trial, and two retrospective). A total of 1775 teeth were assessed, of which 1325 teeth were restored using HT. The retrospective studies showed no difference between HT and other methods whereas the RCTs and quasi-experimental favored HT over other treatment modalities. Meta-analysis significantly favored HT over conventional restorations [risk ratio 5.55 (3.31–9.30)] (p value ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: HT appeared demonstrated higher success and significantly outperformed the conventional restorations.

PDF Share
  1. Petersen PE, Bourgeois D, et al. The global burden of oral diseases and risks to oral health. Bull World Health Organ 2005;83:661–669. DOI: S0042-96862005000900011.
  2. Colak H, Dulgergil CT, et al. Early childhood caries update: a review of causes, diagnoses, and treatments. J Nat Sci Biol Med 2013;4:29–38. DOI: 10.4103/0976-9668.107257.
  3. Dye BA, Mitnik GL, et al. Trends in dental caries in children and adolescents according to poverty status in the United States from 1999 through 2004 and from 2011 through 2014. J Am Dent Assoc 2017;148(8):550–565. DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2017.04.013.
  4. Innes NP, Ricketts DN, et al. Preformed metal crowns for decayed primary molar teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; CD005512. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005512.pub2.
  5. Vargas CM, Crall JJ, et al. Sociodemographic distribution of pediatric dental caries: NHANES III, 1988-1994. J Am Dent Assoc 1998;129: 1229–1238. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1998.0420.
  6. Levine RS, Pitts NB, et al. The fate of 1,587 unrestored carious deciduous teeth: a retrospective general dental practice based study from northern England. Br Dent J 2002;193:99–103. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4801495.
  7. Garg S, Rubin T, et al. How willing are dentists to treat young children?: a survey of dentists affiliated with Medicaid managed care in New York City, 2010. J Am Dent Assoc 2013;144:416–425. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0135.
  8. Milsom K, Tickle M, et al. Does the dental profession know how to care for the primary dentition? Br Dent J 2003;195:301–303. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4810525.
  9. Hyde AC, Rogers HJ, et al. An Overview of Preformed Metal Crowns. Part 2: The Hall Technique. Dent Update 2015;42(939–942):44. DOI: 10.12968/denu.2015.42.10.939.
  10. Rogers HJ, Batley HA, et al. An Overview of Preformed Metal Crowns. Part 1: Conventional Technique. Dent Update 2015;42(933–936):8. DOI: 10.12968/denu.2015.42.10.933.
  11. Kilpatrick NM, Neumann A. Durability of amalgam in the restoration of class II cavities in primary molars: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2007;8:5–13. DOI: 10.1007/BF03262564.
  12. Rasmusson CG, Lundin SA. Class II restorations in six different posterior composite resins: five-year results. Swed Dent J 1995;19: 173–182.
  13. Berg JH. The continuum of restorative materials in pediatric dentistry–a review for the clinician. Pediatr Dent 1998;20:93–100.
  14. Holland IS, Walls AW, et al. The longevity of amalgam restorations in deciduous molars. Br Dent J 1986;161:255–258. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4805948.
  15. Roberts JF, Attari N, et al. The survival of resin modified glass ionomer and stainless steel crown restorations in primary molars, placed in a specialist paediatric dental practice. Br Dent J 2005;198:427–431. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4812197.
  16. Einwag J, Dunninger P. Stainless steel crown versus multisurface amalgam restorations: an 8-year longitudinal clinical study. Quintessence Int 1996;27:321–323.
  17. Wong FS, Day SJ. An investigation of factors influencing the longevity of restorations in primary molars. J Int Assoc Dent Child 1990;20:11–16.
  18. Seale NS. The use of stainless steel crowns. Pediatr Dent 2002;24: 501–505.
  19. Blinkhorn A, Zadeh-Kabir R. Dental care of a child in pain – a comparison of treatment planning options offered by GDPs in California and the North-west of England. Int J Paediatr Dent 2003;13:165–171. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-263X.2003.00454.x.
  20. Threlfall AG, Pilkington L, et al. General dental practitioners’ views on the use of stainless steel crowns to restore primary molars. Br Dent J 2005;199:453–455. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4812746.
  21. Roshan D, Curzon ME, et al. Changes in dentists’ attitudes and practice in paediatric dentistry. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2003;4:21–27.
  22. Innes N, Evans D, et al. The Hall Technique for managing carious primary molars. Dent Update 2009;36(472–474):7–8. DOI: 10.12968/denu.2009.36.8.472.
  23. Welbury RR. The Hall Technique 10 years on: its effect and influence. Br Dent J 2017;222:421–422. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.262.
  24. Santamaria RM, Innes NP, et al. Caries management strategies for primary molars: 1-yr randomized control trial results. J Dent Res 2014;93:1062–1069. DOI: 10.1177/0022034514550717.
  25. Santamaria RM, Innes NP, et al. Acceptability of different caries management methods for primary molars in a RCT. Int J Paediatr Dent 2015;25:9–17. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12097.
  26. Innes NP, Evans DJ, et al. Sealing caries in primary molars: randomized control trial, 5-year results. J Dent Res 2011;90:1405–1410. DOI: 10.1177/0022034511422064.
  27. Innes NP, Evans DJ, et al. The Hall Technique; a randomized controlled clinical trial of a novel method of managing carious primary molars in general dental practice: acceptability of the technique and outcomes at 23 months. BMC Oral Health 2007;7:18. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6831-7-18.
  28. Innes NP, Ricketts D, et al. Preformed crowns for decayed primary molar teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; CD005512. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005512.pub3.
  29. Moher D, Liberati A, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264–269. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135.
  30. Higgins JP, Altman DG, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d5928.
  31. Zeng X, Zhang Y, et al. The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review. J Evid Based Med 2015;8:2–10. DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12141.
  32. Tonmukayakul U, Martin R, et al. Protocol for the Hall Technique study: A trial to measure clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stainless steel crowns for dental caries restoration in primary molars in young children. Contemp Clin Trials 2015;44:36–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.005.
  33. Hesse D, de Araujo MP, et al. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment compared to the Hall Technique for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2016;17:169. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1270-z.
  34. Amourette L, Vaysse F, et al. Faculté de chirurgie d. Approches thérapeutiques non conventionnelles de la carie en pédodontie. France: Universite Toulouse III; 2013.
  35. Innes NP, Stirrups DR, et al. A novel technique using preformed metal crowns for managing carious primary molars in general practice - a retrospective analysis. Br Dent J 2006;200:451–454. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4813466.
  36. Ludwig KH, Fontana M, et al. The success of stainless steel crowns placed with the Hall technique: a retrospective study. J Am Dent Assoc 2014;145:1248–1253. DOI: 10.14219/jada.2014.89.
  37. Santamaria RM, Innes NPT, et al. Alternative Caries Management Options for Primary Molars: 2.5-Year Outcomes of a Randomised Clinical Trial. Caries Res 2017;51:605–614. DOI: 10.1159/000477855.
  38. Boyd DH, Page LF, et al. The Hall Technique and conventional restorative treatment in New Zealand children's primary oral health care - clinical outcomes at two years. Int J Paediatr Dent 2018;28: 180–188. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12324.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.