Influence of patient factors on age of restorations at failure and reasons for their placement and replacement
Influence of patient factors on age of restorations at failure and reasons for their placement and replacement
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0300-5712(01)00022-7
复制
发表时间：
2001-07-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Mjör, IA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Burke, FJT;Wilson, NHF;Mjör, IA
目的：本研究探讨的原因，由一组选定的牙科医生的安置和更换牙列，并提供相关的数据与患者的因素，如患者的年龄和性别，龋齿的风险，咬合功能和口腔卫生，与恢复longthes.Method：一组普通牙科医生（GDPs）被招募参加这项研究。要求每名参与者从潜在原因列表中记录放置或更换支架的原因。被替换的修复体的年龄和类别也被记录，因为也是所使用的材料和材料被replaced.Results：详细的原因放置/更换收到3196从32个GDPs的解释。在放置的替代物中，54%为银汞合金，32%为复合材料，8%为复合物，7%为玻璃离子。放置/更换牙齿的原因主要是原发性龋（28%）、继发性龋（29%）、边缘断裂（10%）、牙齿断裂（7%）和非龋性缺损（6%）。总的来说，失败时的平均年龄为7.1岁。在接受玻璃离子充填的患者中，29%的患者被评为口腔卫生不良，相比之下，接受银汞合金充填的患者为18%，接受复合充填的患者为18%，接受复合充填的患者为23%。在玻璃离子充填组中，患龋率为35%，银汞合金充填组为27%，复合充填组为21%，复合充填组为30%。继发龋是更换牙本质的最常见原因。结果还表明，不同的材料，为不同的患者选择性应用。(C)2001爱思唯尔科技有限公司版权所有。
Objective: This study examined the reasons given by a selected group of dental practitioners for placement and replacement of restorations and correlated the data provided with patient factors, such as patients' age and gender, caries risk, occlusal function and oral hygiene, with restoration longevity.Method: A group of general dental practitioners (GDPs) were recruited to take part in the study. Each participant was asked to record the reason for placement or replacement of restorations from a list of potential reasons. The age and Class of the restoration being replaced was also recorded, as also was the material being used and the material being replaced.Results: Details of reason for placement/replacement was received on 3196 restorations from 32 GDPs. Of the restorations placed, 54% were amalgam, 32% composite, 8% compomer and 7% glass ionomer. The reasons for placement/replacement of the restorations were principally primary caries (28%), secondary caries (29%), margin fracture (10%), tooth fracture (7%), and non-carious defects (6%). Overall, the mean age of restorations at failure was 7.1 years. Of the patients who received glass ionomer restorations, 29% were rated as having poor oral hygiene, compared with 18% of the patients who received amalgam restorations, 18% of the patients who received composite restorations and 23% of the patients who received compomer restorations. Of the patients who received glass ionomer restorations, 35% were rated as having high caries susceptibility, compared with 27% of those receiving amalgam restorations, 21% of those receiving composite restorations and 30% of those receiving compomer restorations.Conclusion: Primary caries was the principal reason for initial restorations. Secondary caries was the most prevalent reason for replacement of restorations. The results also indicate a selective application of different materials for different patients. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.