Methods of clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials

Knibbs, P J

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.1997.tb00303.x

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 118 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, long-term clinical studies complement these studies and provide further information regarding the performance of these materials over an acceptable time period and their cost-effectiveness. 13 The clinical performance of compomer as a Class II restorative procedure in primary molars has been evaluated in several studies, 7,9,12,[14][15][16][17] but these studies tested the performance of only one material each time, Dyract or F2000. These scenarios suggest the need for longitudinal studies, which use these materials at the same time to eliminate operator, material manipulation and subject variabilities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results

Pascon

Kantovitz

Scarparo

et al. 2006

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results

Pascon

Kantovitz

Scarparo

et al. 2006

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Photographs, although not (yet) being able to give a three-dimensional image, seem to be suitable for caries detection [ 6 ]. Also in other domains such as dental material evaluation, standardized photographs seem to be valuable tools of observation [ 21 ]. Standardization is important if texture and color (as used in the ICDAS definition) has to be judged.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of occlusal caries detection using the ICDAS criteria on extracted teeth or their photographs

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUsing photographs of occlusal surfaces instead of extracted teeth for the detection of caries can be useful in multicenter studies or education. Using a panel of observers, ICDAS scores on teeth or photographs were evaluated against the histological gold standard. The hypothesis was that both outcomes were equivalent.MethodsFour examiners with different experience in ICDAS scored photographs of occlusal surfaces of 100 extracted teeth on a monitor using ICDAS criteria. Two of the examiners had previously scored extracted teeth prior to photography. Digital images of histological sections of the teeth were observed by all examiners and consensus scores were given for each investigation site (gold standard). Kappa statistics and Spearman correlation coefficients as well as repeated measure ANOVA were performed. ROC curves were constructed for each examiner and the areas under the ROC-curves (AUC) of both scoring techniques (extracted teeth, digital images) were compared (α = 0.05).ResultsIntra- and inter-rater kappa for ICDAS on teeth were 0.81–0.94 and on photographs 0.54–0.88, respectively. Correlation with histology was 0.58– 0.61 for the teeth and 0.50–0.62 for the photographs. AUC of ICDAS scores of extracted teeth (mean 0.89) were slightly higher than those for photographs (mean 0.84). However, both AUC values were not statistically significant (p = 0.38).ConclusionUsing photographs to assess occlusal surfaces with the ICDAS criteria was not statistically different from scoring the extracted teeth.

show abstract

“…The pre-determined indicators of the mechanical risk prognosis were chosen from a number of other indicators that are vaguely described in the literature, as these were objectively analyzed within a pool of restorations previously classified as "unsatisfactory" or "failed," meaning that within a medium (Bravo) or short (Charlie) period of time, these restorations required repair or replacement [16][17][18][19][20][21] . In addition, this study design corresponds to descriptions at a specific time in the long-term life of the restorations (cross-sectional) and not to a follow-up assessment from the origin of the restoration 22 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indicators of the risk mechanics for Class-I and Class-II amalgam and composite resin restorations

Fernández¹,

Arroyo²,

Pardo³

et al. 2014

Braz. J. Oral Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To determine indicators of prognosis for mechanical risks of amalgam and composite resin restorations in permanent teeth. Methods: Thirty-nine adult patients with direct clinical, photographic, radiographic and model examinations. A total of 256 restorations were classified as "not satisfactory," with Bravo or Charlie values according to the modified Ryge /USPHS criteria. The total "n" was divided into Bravo and Charlie groups according to the value obtained in the "marginal adaptation" parameter. Each of the groups was subdivided by the type of material (amalgam and composite resins) and the class: occlusal (O) and proximal (MOD). Results: Comparing the Bravo and Charlie groups, the statistically significant indicators were: the mesiodistal dimension (p=0.037), the distal isthmus (p<0.05), the average of the isthmuses (p<0.05), the distal (p<0.05) cavity depth, and the average depth of the MOD (p<0.05) cavities. It was concluded that the type and the class of the restoration are not indicators for sampling. Conclusions: With regard to the design of the cavity preparation, the valid mechanical risk indicators include the mesiodistal dimension, the distal isthmus, the average of the isthmuses, the depth of the distal cavity and the average depth of the MOD cavities. A simple clinical assessment does not provide sufficient information to establish the indicators for mechanical failure risk of restorations.

show abstract

Methods of clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials

Cited by 9 publications

References 118 publications

Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results

Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results

Comparison of occlusal caries detection using the ICDAS criteria on extracted teeth or their photographs

Indicators of the risk mechanics for Class-I and Class-II amalgam and composite resin restorations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About