Successful use of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) in children has been reported, but little information is available regarding its use in older adults. The hypothesis of this study was that survival rates of root restorations placed by both ART and the conventional technique were similar. Root-surface caries lesions in 103 institutionalized elders in Hong Kong were treated randomly by either: (1) the conventional approach-caries removed by dental burs, and the cavity filled with light-cured resin-modified glass ionomer; or (2) the ART approach-caries removed by hand instruments, and the cavity filled with chemically cured high-strength glass ionomer. In total, 84 conventional and 78 ART restorations were placed. After 12 months, 63 conventional and 59 ART restorations were reviewed, and the respective 12-month survival rates were 91.7% and 87.0% (p > 0.05). It is concluded that the survival rates of both types of root restorations were high and similar.