Literature DB >> 10752459

Reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations in vocational training practices.

F J Burke1, S W Cheung, I A Mjör, N H Wilson.   

Abstract

AIM: The reasons for placement and replacement of restorations are central to clinical practice. It is the purpose of this paper to assess the reasons for placement and replacement of restorations in the practices of vocational dental practitioners (VDPs) and their trainers.
METHOD: VDPs and their trainers were invited to take part in the study. VDPs were asked to record the principal reason for the placement or replacement of all restorations which they provided for a one-month period and, also, to record the age, Class and materials used for each restoration replaced (if known). Trainers were also asked to participate. The data thereby collected were analysed statistically.
RESULTS: 56 VDPs and 17 trainers participated. Data were obtained on a total of 9031 restorations, 4423 (49%) being initial placements and 4608 (51%) replacements. Of the total number of restorations assessed, 54% were amalgam, 30% composite and 16% glass ionomer. Principal reasons for placement/replacement of the restorations were primary caries (41%), secondary caries (22%), tooth fracture (6%), margin fracture/degradation (6%), non-carious defects (6%) and bulk fracture (5%). The type of existing restorative material was recorded for 4196 restorations: secondary caries was the most common reason for the replacement of restorations--for 46.0%, 39.6% and 39.8% of amalgam, composite and glass-ionomer restorations respectively. VDPs placed more restorations as a consequence of caries than their trainers.
CONCLUSION: Primary caries is the most common reason for the placement of restorations by the participating dentists, and secondary caries is the most common reason for the replacement of restorations of amalgam, composite and glass ionomer. VDPs placed more restorations as a consequence of caries than their trainers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10752459

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prim Dent Care        ISSN: 1355-7610


  7 in total

1.  Resin-based composite performance: are there some things we can't predict?

Authors:  Jack L Ferracane
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Association between caries location and restorative material treatment provided.

Authors:  Erinne B Lubisich; Thomas J Hilton; Jack L Ferracane; Hristina I Pashova; Bruce Burton
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2011-01-21       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Evaluating fluoride uptake of dentin from different restorative materials at various time intervals - In vitro study.

Authors:  Sanjyot Mulay; Kunal Galankar; Saranya Varadarajan; Archana A Gupta
Journal:  J Oral Biol Craniofac Res       Date:  2021-12-28

4.  Restoration outcomes after restoring vital teeth with advanced caries lesions: a practice-based retrospective study.

Authors:  Falk Schwendicke; Hannes Krüger; Peter Schlattmann; Sebastian Paris
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 5.  In vitro and in vivo studies on the toxicity of dental resin components: a review.

Authors:  Michel Goldberg
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2007-11-27       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Reasons for Placement and Replacement of Resin-based Composite Restorations in Greece.

Authors:  Nikolaos Andreas Chrysanthakopoulos
Journal:  J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects       Date:  2011-09-05

Review 7.  Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: amalgam.

Authors:  Mohammad O Sharif; Alison Merry; Melanie Catleugh; Martin Tickle; Paul Brunton; Stephen M Dunne; Vishal R Aggarwal; Lee Yee Chong
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-02-08
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.