z-logo
Premium
Provisional Crown Failures in Dental School Predoctoral Clinics
Author(s) -
Hyde Jeffrey D.,
Bader James A.,
Shugars Daniel A.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
journal of dental education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.53
H-Index - 68
eISSN - 1930-7837
pISSN - 0022-0337
DOI - 10.1002/j.0022-0337.2007.71.11.tb04411.x
Subject(s) - crown (dentistry) , medicine , dentistry , luting agent , odds ratio , logistic regression , chemistry , bond strength , adhesive , organic chemistry , layer (electronics) , pathology
Following a preliminary study indicating that at least 10 percent of single‐unit crown temporary restorations failed in patients who received treatment by predoctoral students, a comprehensive examination of provisional crown failure was initiated to identify strategies to reduce the failure rate. For all provisionalized, natural tooth, single‐unit crown preparations in University of North Carolina School of Dentistry predoctoral clinics for one year (N=1008), we noted tooth type, type of crown, student level, faculty coverage experience, treatment clinic, temporary material and luting agent, and retreatment (failure) of the provisional restoration. For failures, we also noted the stage of crown preparation at failure and the time since initial placement of the temporary. We analyzed these data using simple cross‐tabs and logistic regression on need for retreatment (α =0.05). The failure rate was 18.75 percent (N=189). The median time to failure was twelve days; the 25 th and 75 th percentiles were six and twenty‐six days. Significant risk factors, in order of odds ratio estimates, were molar tooth, second‐ or third‐year student, and inexperienced faculty. Most provisional failures occurred during the final preparation phase of treatment. Provisional restoration failure is more frequent than was initially suspected from preliminary studies. Strategies for institutional intervention to reduce provisional restoration failure include greater attention to evaluating provisional crowns placed by inexperienced students (sophomores and juniors) and placing more emphasis on the retentiveness of provisional restorations reused following the final impression. Review of provisional evaluation procedures is also indicated for faculty who do not routinely supervise these procedures.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here