修复或更换修复体:一项前瞻性队列研究牙医在全国牙科实践为基础的研究网络。

Texas dental journal Pub Date : 2017-01-01
Valeria V Gordan, Joseph L Riley, D Brad Rindal, Vibeke Qvist, Jeffrey L Fellows, Deborah A Dilbone, Solomon G Brotman, Gregg H Gilbert
{"title":"修复或更换修复体:一项前瞻性队列研究牙医在全国牙科实践为基础的研究网络。","authors":"Valeria V Gordan,&nbsp;Joseph L Riley,&nbsp;D Brad Rindal,&nbsp;Vibeke Qvist,&nbsp;Jeffrey L Fellows,&nbsp;Deborah A Dilbone,&nbsp;Solomon G Brotman,&nbsp;Gregg H Gilbert","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A prospective cohort study that included dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network was conducted to quantify 12-month failures of restorations that were repaired or replaced at baseline. The study tested the hypothesis that no significant differences exist in failure percentages between repaired and replaced restorations after 12 months. It also tested the hypothesis that certain dentist, patient, and restoration characteristics are significantly associated with the incidence of restoration failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dentists recorded data for 50 or more consecutive defective restorations. The restorations that were either - repaired or replaced were recalled after 12 months and characterized for developing defects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dentists (N = 195) recorded data on 5,889 restorations; 378 restorations required additional treatment (74 repaired, 171 replaced, 84 teeth received endodontic treatment, and 49 were extracted). Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that additional treatment was more likely to occur if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with replaced (5%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.1), if a molar was restored (7%) compared with premolars or anterior teeth (5% and 6%, respectively) (OR, 1.4; P = .010; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7), and if the primary reason was a fracture (8%) compared with other reasons (6%) (OR, 1.3; P = .033; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An additional treatment was more likely to occur within the first year if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with being replaced (5%). However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment (replacement, endodontic treatment, or extraction) than replaced restorations.</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>One year after repair or replacement of a defective restoration, the failure rate was low. However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment than replaced restorations.</p>","PeriodicalId":74919,"journal":{"name":"Texas dental journal","volume":"134 1","pages":"20-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Repair or Replacement of Restorations: A Prospective cohort study by dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.\",\"authors\":\"Valeria V Gordan,&nbsp;Joseph L Riley,&nbsp;D Brad Rindal,&nbsp;Vibeke Qvist,&nbsp;Jeffrey L Fellows,&nbsp;Deborah A Dilbone,&nbsp;Solomon G Brotman,&nbsp;Gregg H Gilbert\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A prospective cohort study that included dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network was conducted to quantify 12-month failures of restorations that were repaired or replaced at baseline. The study tested the hypothesis that no significant differences exist in failure percentages between repaired and replaced restorations after 12 months. It also tested the hypothesis that certain dentist, patient, and restoration characteristics are significantly associated with the incidence of restoration failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dentists recorded data for 50 or more consecutive defective restorations. The restorations that were either - repaired or replaced were recalled after 12 months and characterized for developing defects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dentists (N = 195) recorded data on 5,889 restorations; 378 restorations required additional treatment (74 repaired, 171 replaced, 84 teeth received endodontic treatment, and 49 were extracted). Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that additional treatment was more likely to occur if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with replaced (5%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.1), if a molar was restored (7%) compared with premolars or anterior teeth (5% and 6%, respectively) (OR, 1.4; P = .010; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7), and if the primary reason was a fracture (8%) compared with other reasons (6%) (OR, 1.3; P = .033; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An additional treatment was more likely to occur within the first year if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with being replaced (5%). However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment (replacement, endodontic treatment, or extraction) than replaced restorations.</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>One year after repair or replacement of a defective restoration, the failure rate was low. However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment than replaced restorations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Texas dental journal\",\"volume\":\"134 1\",\"pages\":\"20-32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Texas dental journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Texas dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:一项前瞻性队列研究,包括全国牙科实践为基础的研究网络的牙医进行量化12个月的修复失败或更换在基线。该研究验证了一个假设,即12个月后修复和更换修复之间的失败率没有显著差异。它还验证了某些牙医、患者和修复特征与修复失败发生率显著相关的假设。方法:牙科医生记录50例或更多连续缺陷修复体的数据。修复或更换的修复体在12个月后被召回,并以出现缺陷为特征。结果:牙医(N = 195)记录了5889个修复体的数据;378个修复体需要额外治疗(74个修复,171个更换,84个接受根管治疗,49个拔除)。多变量logistic回归分析表明,如果修复了原始修复体(7%),而不是更换了(5%),则更有可能发生额外的治疗(优势比[OR], 1.6;P < .001;95%可信区间[CI], 1.2-2.1),与前磨牙或前牙(分别为5%和6%)相比,如果修复了臼齿(7%)(or, 1.4;P = 0.010;95% CI, 1.1-1.7),如果主要原因是骨折(8%)与其他原因(6%)相比(OR, 1.3;P = 0.033;95% ci, 1.1-1.6)。结论:与替换(5%)相比,如果原修复体已修复(7%),则在第一年内进行额外治疗的可能性更大。然而,修复后的修复体比替代修复体更不可能需要积极的治疗(替代,根管治疗或拔牙)。实际意义:修复或更换有缺陷的修复后一年,故障率很低。然而,修复的修复体比替换的修复体更不可能需要积极的治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Repair or Replacement of Restorations: A Prospective cohort study by dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Background: A prospective cohort study that included dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network was conducted to quantify 12-month failures of restorations that were repaired or replaced at baseline. The study tested the hypothesis that no significant differences exist in failure percentages between repaired and replaced restorations after 12 months. It also tested the hypothesis that certain dentist, patient, and restoration characteristics are significantly associated with the incidence of restoration failure.

Methods: Dentists recorded data for 50 or more consecutive defective restorations. The restorations that were either - repaired or replaced were recalled after 12 months and characterized for developing defects.

Results: Dentists (N = 195) recorded data on 5,889 restorations; 378 restorations required additional treatment (74 repaired, 171 replaced, 84 teeth received endodontic treatment, and 49 were extracted). Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that additional treatment was more likely to occur if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with replaced (5%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.1), if a molar was restored (7%) compared with premolars or anterior teeth (5% and 6%, respectively) (OR, 1.4; P = .010; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7), and if the primary reason was a fracture (8%) compared with other reasons (6%) (OR, 1.3; P = .033; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6).

Conclusions: An additional treatment was more likely to occur within the first year if the original restoration had been repaired (7%) compared with being replaced (5%). However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment (replacement, endodontic treatment, or extraction) than replaced restorations.

Practical implications: One year after repair or replacement of a defective restoration, the failure rate was low. However, repaired restorations were less likely to need an aggressive treatment than replaced restorations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信