ArticleClinical oral investigations2021
Material selection for tooth-supported single crowns-a survey among dentists in Germany.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Treatment preferences related to pulpectomy and prosthetic restorations among Lithuanian general dentists and prosthodontists.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Article
- Dentists' Knowledge and Clinical Preferences Regarding Evidence-Based Restorative Material Selection in Türkiye: Implications for Clinical Practice and Healthcare Policy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Factors Influencing the Selection of Materials and Luting Agents for Single-Crown Restorations.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Factors Influencing Dentists' Choice of Restorative Materials for Single-Tooth Crowns: A Survey Among Saudi Practitioners.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Modern Polymers for Dental Application.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- The possibility of clinical bonding between metal/ceramic brackets to zirconia:Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Long-term survival of monolithic tooth-supported lithium disilicate crowns fabricated using a chairside approach: 15-year results.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
- Review
- Retrospective clinical study of tooth-supported single crowns: A multifactor analysis.European journal of oral sciences · 2022Article
- Rhombohedral Phase Formation in Yttria-Stabilized Zirconia Induced by Dental Technical Tools and Its Impact on Dental Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Substantial in-vitro and emerging clinical evidence supporting immediate dentin sealing.The Japanese dental science review · 2021Review
- Tooth-Colored CAD/CAM Materials for Application in 3-Unit Fixed Dental Prostheses in the Molar Area: An Illustrated Clinical Comparison.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- The Frequency of Dental Materials Use for Fixed Prostheses in a General Dental Practice.Current health sciences journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to survey dentists in Germany to identify their favored materials for the fabrication of tooth-supported single crowns (SCs) depending on the location of the abutment teeth and the preparation margin. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe survey included questions regarding demographic characteristics of dentists/their dental practice and preferred restorative materials for the fabrication of SCs for abutment teeth 16, 11, 34, and 36 with either supra- or subgingival preparation margins.
resultsBetween August 2019 and February 2020, 721 dentists participated in the survey; responses from 33 dentists were excluded from data analysis because the dentists did not work in Germany or provided less than one fixed dental prosthesis/month. Dentists favored ceramic materials independent of the location of the abutment tooth and preparation margin (56.6-92.2%). CAD/CAM resin composites or full metals were preferred by only a few participants. A significantly higher proportion of dentists recommended porcelain fused to metal for subgingival preparation margins than for supragingival margins (p < 0.001). Characteristics of dentists/dental practices influenced a single scenario (11 subgingival) that was dependent on the dentist's time since graduation. When asked to specify the ceramic materials, numerous participants wrote a free response (5.7-7.8%) or did not answer (0.7-4.8%).
conclusionsDentists in Germany selected restorative materials for SCs depending on the clinical scenario. Since numerous dentists did not specify the ceramic materials, postgraduate information and education might help to extend expertise. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The results of this survey provide insight into the favored materials of dentists for the fabrication of tooth-supported SCs.
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.