ArticleJournal of dentistry2014
The decision to repair or replace a defective restoration is affected by who placed the original restoration: findings from the National Dental PBRN.
Article in Journal of dentistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Decision-Making of Repair vs. Replacement of Defective Direct Dental Restorations: A Multinational Cross-Sectional Study With Meta-Analysis.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025Pooled it
- Survival analysis of posterior composite restorations in National Dental PBRN general dentistry practices.Journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- Characteristics of dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.Journal of dentistry · 2023Article
- Assessment of knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding Deep Margin Elevation (DME) among dental practitioners in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2021Article
- Article
- Secondary caries: what is it, and how it can be controlled, detected, and managed?Clinical oral investigations · 2020Review
- Influence of different universal adhesives on the repair performance of hybrid CAD-CAM materials.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2019Article
- Attitudes, practice, and experience of German dentists regarding repair restorations.Clinical oral investigations · 2017Article
- Treatment recommendations for single-unit crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2016Article
- Connecting and Collaborating: Developing National Dental PBRN Study Concepts Through POD Engagement.Health promotion practice · 2016Article
- Repair or replacement of restorations: A prospective cohort study by dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate how restoration characteristics are associated with the decision to repair or replace an existing restoration. The following hypotheses were studied: dentists who placed the original restoration are more likely to repair instead of replace restorations (H1) that are in molar teeth; (H2) that are in the upper arch; (H3) that have amalgam restorative material; (H4) if a fracture is not the primary reason for the defect; and (H5) when the restoration comprises more than one surface.
methodsThis cross-sectional study used a consecutive patient/restoration recruitment design. 194 dentists members of a dental practice-based research network recorded data on restorations in permanent teeth that needed repair or replacement.
resultsFor 6623 of the 8770 defective restorations in 6643 patients, the treatment was provided by the dentist who had not placed the original restoration (75%). The 2-way interaction revealed that dentists who had placed the original restoration often chose to repair when the defective restoration was in a molar, relative to premolar or anterior teeth (OR=2.2, p<.001); and chose to replace when the restoration had amalgam (OR=0.5, p<.001), and when it was a fracture compared to another reason (OR=0.8, p=001).
conclusionMost dentists are not conservative when they revisit a restoration that they originally placed regardless of type of failure, number of surfaces or material used. However, dentists who had placed the original restoration were significantly more likely to repair it when the defective restoration was in a molar tooth. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Most dentists who placed the original restoration were prone to replace it, however if the defective restoration was located in a molar tooth they would consider repairing it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.