Skip to main content

Table 4 Ordered Logistic Regression analysis of the final discomfort between the groups and independent variables considering the highest discomfort score between the orthodontic separator and the crown placement

From: Atraumatic restorative treatment compared to the Hall Technique for occluso-proximal carious lesions in primary molars; 36-month follow-up of a randomised control trial in a school setting

Variables

Unadjusted OR (95% CI)

p-value

Adjusted OR (95% CI)

p-value

Treatment

    

ART (ref)

    

HT

3.20 (1.62–6.32)

0.001*

3.67 (1.79–7.49)

< 0.001*

Age (years)

    

5–6.9 (ref)

    

7–8.9

0.67 (0.28–1.60)

0.365

0.70 (0.27–1.79)

0.454

≥ 9

0.93 (0.35–2.49)

0.888

0.85 (0.29–2.49)

0.770

Sex

    

Male (ref)

    

Female

0.95 (0.49–1.85)

0.887

  

Operator

    

Specialist (ref)

    

Student 1

0.88 (0.39–1.98)

0.756

  

Student 2

1.61 (0.72–3.59)

0.246

  

Jaw

    

Upper (ref)

    

Lower

1.32 (0.68–2.55)

0.417

  

Primary Tooth

    

1st Molar (ref)

    

2nd Molar

0.53 (0.27–1.05)

0.068

0.53 (0.25–1.09)

0.086

DMFT/dmft

    

0 and 1 (ref)

    

3 and 4

0.96 (0.44–2.05)

0.907

0.93 (0.42–2.06)

0.854

 ≥ 4

0.54 (0.24–1.25)

0.150

0.43 (0.25–1.09)

0.086

  1. ART Atraumatic Restorative Treatment, HT Hall Technique, OR odds ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval
  2. *Statistically significant difference (p < 0.05)