Medical economic analysis on the applicability and usefulness of restorations based on minimal intervention with adhesive materials

在临床实践中，基于最小干预的修复体(MI修复体)在非生命牙中的使用率远低于在活力牙中的使用率。MI的识别并没有导致MI修复体在非活力牙的临床应用增加，但在活力牙的病例中却增加了。此外，限制MI修复体临床应用的因素包括对粘接材料的粘接性能和牙齿折断的担忧。这些发现与毕业后多年或接受调查的牙医的医院科室之间没有很强的联系。

Restorations based on minimal intervention (MI restorations) were used much less in non-vital teeth than in vital teeth in clinical practice. MI recognition did not result in an increase in the clinical use of MI restorations for non-vital teeth, but did so for cases of vital teeth. Moreover, the factors limiting the clinical use of MI restorations in non-vital teeth included concerns about the adhesive properties of adhesive materials and tooth fracture. There was not a strong association between these findings and years of post-graduation or hospital sections of the dentists surveyed.