ArticleDentistry journal2021
Survival of Single-Unit Porcelain-Fused-to-Metal (PFM) and Metal Crowns Placed by Students at an Australian University Dental Clinic over a Five-Year Period.
Article in Dentistry journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The quality of fixed prosthetic work provided by undergraduate dental students and its correlation with patient satisfaction: a prospective study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Quality of Fixed Dental Prostheses and Patient Satisfaction in a Sample From Saudi Arabia.Cureus · 2023Article
- Comparison of marginal microleakage of metal copings cemented with three luting cements.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the survival rate of single-unit porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) and metal crowns placed by dental students at an Australian university undergraduate dental clinic over a five-year period. Complications and the incidences of crown failures were recorded. Clinical records pertaining to single-unit PFM and metal crowns inserted over a five-year period were reviewed, including patient-related, tooth-related, and procedural factors for each crown. Crowns were evaluated as surviving, surviving with complications, or failed. Kaplan-Meier statistical analysis was used to estimate survival rate., This study is based on a sample of 232 (78.4%) PFM crowns and 64 (21.6%) metal crowns inserted between 2014 and 2018. Cumulatively, 224 (75.7%) were surviving, 48 (16.2%) were surviving but previously had complications, and 24 (8.1%) failed. The 5-year cumulative survival rate of all PFM and metal crowns was 83.9% (0.839 ± 0.038, Kaplan-Meier). The average survival time for all crowns was 4.432 ± 0.089 years. Comparatively, PFM crowns had a higher survival rate at 1 year (0.972 ± 0.010) and 2 years (0.919 ± 0.017), compared to metal crowns at 1 year (0.964 ± 0.011) and 2 years (0.894± 0.018). The survival rate of metal crowns remained constant from 2 years to 4 years and thereafter, whereas there was a continued decline in the survival rate of PFM crowns to 83.2% (0.832 ± 0.038) at 4 years and thereafter. Crowns placed on premolars had the highest cumulative survival rate whereas those placed on molars exhibited the lowest survival rate for the duration of the study period. Despite single-unit PFM crowns having a higher 1- and 2-year survival rate compared to metal crowns, metal crowns had a higher survival rate at 4 years and thereafter. Survival rates are comparable to previous studies.
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.