Abstract
Background: In this article, the authors present clinical factors associated with the type of cement practitioners use for restoration of single-unit crowns. Methods: A total of 202 dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network recorded clinical details (including cement type) used for 3,468 single-unit crowns. The authors classified crowns as bonded if the dentist used a resin cement. The authors used mixed-model logistic regression to assess the associations between various clinical factors and the dentist's decision to bond. Results: A total of 38.1% of crowns were bonded, and 61.9% were nonbonded; 39.1% (79 of 202) of dentists never bonded a crown, and 20.3% (41 of 202) of dentists bonded every crown in the study. Crowns with excessive occlusal reduction (as judged by laboratory technicians) were more likely to be bonded (P =.02); however, there was no association with bonding and excessive taper (P =.15) or axial reduction (P =.08). Crowns were more likely to be bonded if they were fabricated from leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (76.5%) or lithium disilicate (70.8%) than if they were fabricated from layered zirconia (38.8%), full-contour zirconia (30.1%), full metal (14.7%), or porcelain-fused-to-metal (13.8%) (P <.01) restorative material. There was no significant association between choice to bond and crown margin location (P =.35). Crowns in the anterior maxilla were more likely to be bonded (P <.01). Conclusions: Excessive occlusal tooth preparation, anterior location of a crown, and the use of glass ceramic crowns were associated significantly with the decision to bond. Practical Implications: In this study, the authors identified factors significantly associated with the clinical decision made by practicing dentists when selecting a cement for restoration of single-unit crowns.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of the American Dental Association |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 1 2019 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- crowns
- dental bonding
- fixed prosthetics
- glass ionomer cements
- Resin cements
- restorative dentistry
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Dentistry(all)
Cite this
Choice of cement for single-unit crowns : Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. / National Dental Practice-Based Research Network Collaborative Group.
In: Journal of the American Dental Association, 01.01.2019.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Choice of cement for single-unit crowns
T2 - Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network
AU - National Dental Practice-Based Research Network Collaborative Group
AU - Lawson, Nathaniel C.
AU - Litaker, Mark S.
AU - Ferracane, Jack
AU - Gordan, Valeria V.
AU - Atlas, Alan M.
AU - Rios, Tara
AU - Gilbert, Gregg H.
AU - McCracken, Michael S.
PY - 2019/1/1
Y1 - 2019/1/1
N2 - Background: In this article, the authors present clinical factors associated with the type of cement practitioners use for restoration of single-unit crowns. Methods: A total of 202 dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network recorded clinical details (including cement type) used for 3,468 single-unit crowns. The authors classified crowns as bonded if the dentist used a resin cement. The authors used mixed-model logistic regression to assess the associations between various clinical factors and the dentist's decision to bond. Results: A total of 38.1% of crowns were bonded, and 61.9% were nonbonded; 39.1% (79 of 202) of dentists never bonded a crown, and 20.3% (41 of 202) of dentists bonded every crown in the study. Crowns with excessive occlusal reduction (as judged by laboratory technicians) were more likely to be bonded (P =.02); however, there was no association with bonding and excessive taper (P =.15) or axial reduction (P =.08). Crowns were more likely to be bonded if they were fabricated from leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (76.5%) or lithium disilicate (70.8%) than if they were fabricated from layered zirconia (38.8%), full-contour zirconia (30.1%), full metal (14.7%), or porcelain-fused-to-metal (13.8%) (P <.01) restorative material. There was no significant association between choice to bond and crown margin location (P =.35). Crowns in the anterior maxilla were more likely to be bonded (P <.01). Conclusions: Excessive occlusal tooth preparation, anterior location of a crown, and the use of glass ceramic crowns were associated significantly with the decision to bond. Practical Implications: In this study, the authors identified factors significantly associated with the clinical decision made by practicing dentists when selecting a cement for restoration of single-unit crowns.
AB - Background: In this article, the authors present clinical factors associated with the type of cement practitioners use for restoration of single-unit crowns. Methods: A total of 202 dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network recorded clinical details (including cement type) used for 3,468 single-unit crowns. The authors classified crowns as bonded if the dentist used a resin cement. The authors used mixed-model logistic regression to assess the associations between various clinical factors and the dentist's decision to bond. Results: A total of 38.1% of crowns were bonded, and 61.9% were nonbonded; 39.1% (79 of 202) of dentists never bonded a crown, and 20.3% (41 of 202) of dentists bonded every crown in the study. Crowns with excessive occlusal reduction (as judged by laboratory technicians) were more likely to be bonded (P =.02); however, there was no association with bonding and excessive taper (P =.15) or axial reduction (P =.08). Crowns were more likely to be bonded if they were fabricated from leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (76.5%) or lithium disilicate (70.8%) than if they were fabricated from layered zirconia (38.8%), full-contour zirconia (30.1%), full metal (14.7%), or porcelain-fused-to-metal (13.8%) (P <.01) restorative material. There was no significant association between choice to bond and crown margin location (P =.35). Crowns in the anterior maxilla were more likely to be bonded (P <.01). Conclusions: Excessive occlusal tooth preparation, anterior location of a crown, and the use of glass ceramic crowns were associated significantly with the decision to bond. Practical Implications: In this study, the authors identified factors significantly associated with the clinical decision made by practicing dentists when selecting a cement for restoration of single-unit crowns.
KW - crowns
KW - dental bonding
KW - fixed prosthetics
KW - glass ionomer cements
KW - Resin cements
KW - restorative dentistry
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064645453&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85064645453&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.01.021
DO - 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.01.021
M3 - Article
C2 - 31030937
AN - SCOPUS:85064645453
JO - Journal of the American Dental Association
JF - Journal of the American Dental Association
SN - 0002-8177
ER -