Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20945739›Full record

ArticleOperative dentistry

Rubber dam use during routine operative dentistry procedures: findings from the Dental PBRN.

Gregg H Gilbert, Mark S Litaker, Daniel J Pihlstrom, Craig W Amundson, Valeria V Gordan, DPBRN Collaborative Group

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Operative dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dental dam utilization by dentists in an intramural faculty practice.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Prevalence of Rubber Dam Usage during Endodontic Procedure: A Questionnaire Survey.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2014
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gregg H GilbertDepartment of General Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. ghg@uab.edu
Mark S Litaker
Daniel J Pihlstrom
Craig W Amundson
Valeria V Gordan
DPBRN Collaborative Group
University of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

Dental PBRN Network ChairU01DE016747 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI GILBERT, GREGG H · 2005 to 2011
$17.3M
Dental Practice-Based Research Network Coordinating CtrU01DE016746 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI FUNKHOUSER, ELLEN M · 2005 to 2011
$7.0M
NIDCR NIH HHS DE-16746NIDCR NIH HHS U01 DE016746NIDCR NIH HHS U01 DE016747
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rubber dam use during operative dentistry procedures has been quantified based on questionnaires completed by dentists. However, based on the knowledge of the authors of the current study, there are no reports based on use during actual clinical procedures other than in dental materials studies and none based on routine care. The objectives of the current study were to: 1) quantify how commonly the rubber dam is used during operative dentistry procedures; 2) test the hypothesis that certain dentist, restoration and patient-level factors are associated with its use. A total of 229 dentist practitioner-investigators in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) participated. DPBRN comprises five regions of the USA: Alabama/Mississippi, Florida/Georgia, Minnesota, Permanente Dental Associates and Scandinavia. Practitioner-investigators collected data on 9,890 consecutive restorations done in previously unrestored tooth surfaces from 5,810 patients. Most dentists (63%) did not use a rubber dam for any restoration in this study. A rubber dam was used for only 12% of restorations, 83% of which were used in one DPBRN region. With regions accounted for, no other dentist characteristics were significant. A multi-level multiple logistic regression of rubber dam use was done with restoration and patient-level variables modeled simultaneously. In this multi-variable context, these restoration-level characteristics were statistically significant: tooth-arch type, restoration classification and reason for placing the restoration. These patient-level characteristics were statistically significant: ethnicity, dental insurance and age. These results, obtained from actual clinical procedures rather than questionnaires, document a low prevalence of usage of the rubber dam during operative dentistry procedures. Usage varied with certain dentist, restoration and patient-level characteristics.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsAttitude of Health PersonnelCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchDental ArchDental CariesDental MaterialsDental Restoration, PermanentDentistsEthnicityFemaleGroup Practice, DentalHumansInsurance, DentalDental Materials

Identifiers

PMID20945739
PMCPMC2957301
OpenAlexW4322694792

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.