ArticleJournal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists2019
Remake Rates for Single-Unit Crowns in Clinical Practice: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.
Article in Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and associated factors of laboratory remakes in fixed prosthodontics: a multicenter audit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Digital Fabrication of an Occlusal Reference Index to Facilitate Crown Insertion and Minimize Unnecessary Occlusal Adjustments in Case of Unstable Occlusion: A Clinical Report.Case reports in dentistry · 2026Article
- Changes in Occlusal Contacts upon the Cementation of Zirconia Crowns with Different Cement Spacers.Dentistry journal · 2024Article
- Recruitment strategies and retention rates for five National Dental PBRN studies.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Dimensional and Occlusal Accuracy of Non-Working Antagonist Casts: A Study on Different Impression Materials and 3D Printing.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Technical Accuracy of Dental Laboratories in the Quality and Shade Matching of Porcelain Fused to Metal Crowns: An In Vitro Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Laboratory Technician Assessment of the Quality of Single-Unit Crown Preparations and Impressions as Predictors of the Clinical Acceptability of Crowns as Determined by the Treating Dentist: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2020Article
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
purposeSome crowns returned from the laboratory are clinically unacceptable, and dentists must remake them. The objectives of this study were to: (1) quantify the remake rate of single-unit crowns; and (2) identify factors significantly associated with crown remakes and intraoral fit. MATERIALS AND
methodsDentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network recruited patients needing crowns and documented fabrication techniques, patient characteristics, and outcomes. Crowns were considered clinically acceptable or rejected. Also, various aspects of the clinical fit of the crown were graded and categorized as 'Goodness of Fit (GOF).' Dentist and patient characteristics were tested statistically for associations with crown acceptability and GOF.
resultsMore than 200 dentists participated in this study (N = 205) and evaluated 3750 single-unit crowns. The mean age (years) of patients receiving a crown was 55. The remake rate for crowns was 3.8%. The range of rejection rates among individual practitioners was 0% to 42%. Most clinicians (118, or 58%) did not reject any crowns; all rejections came from 42% of the clinicians (n = 87). The most common reasons for rejections were proximal misfit, marginal errors, and esthetic failures. Fewer years in practice was significantly associated with lower crown success rates and lower fit scores. GOF was also associated with practice busyness and patient insurance status, patient gender (dentists reported better fit for female patients), and patient ethnicity.
conclusionsThe crown remake rate in this study was about 4%. Remakes and crown GOF were associated with certain dentist and practice characteristics.
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.