Choice of cement for single-unit crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network

National Dental Practice-Based Research Network Collaborative Group

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

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 languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of the American Dental Association
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Crowns
Tooth
Research
Dentists
Metals
Tooth Preparation
Resin Cements
Laboratory Personnel
Dental Porcelain
Maxilla
Logistic Models

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 journalArticle

@article{be9a7e32c60a4e8faf653921a74bcf61,
title = "Choice of cement for single-unit crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network",
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.",
keywords = "crowns, dental bonding, fixed prosthetics, glass ionomer cements, Resin cements, restorative dentistry",
author = "{National Dental Practice-Based Research Network Collaborative Group} and Lawson, {Nathaniel C.} and Litaker, {Mark S.} and Jack Ferracane and Gordan, {Valeria V.} and Atlas, {Alan M.} and Tara Rios and Gilbert, {Gregg H.} and McCracken, {Michael S.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.adaj.2019.01.021",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of the American Dental Association",
issn = "0002-8177",
publisher = "American Dental Association",

}

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 -