ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Influence of Practitioner-Related Placement Variables on the Compressive Properties of Bulk-Fill Composite Resins-An In Vitro Clinical Simulation Study.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Influence of Posterior Class II Composite Restoration Location and Techniques on Marginal Sealing.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
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
Aims: To determine if restoration location and/or execution behavior force parameters have an influence on the mechanical properties of bulk-fill composite dental restorations. Methods: Pressure transducers were placed within each quadrant of dental mannequin jaws. Cylindrical molds were placed above the transducers and filled with two bulk-fill composite materials, Filtek and Tetric, by four experienced dentists. Each dentist prepared five specimens per quadrant and material. The total placement time, mean force, number of peak forces (above 25 N), and mean peak(s) force during placement were measured. Then, the stiffness and maximal compressive strength of the specimens were determined while loading the specimens up to failure using a universal loading machine. Results: Placement time was affected by jaw (p < 0.004) and side (p < 0.029), with the shortest time demonstrated for the left side of the mandible. Force exerted during restoration placement was not normally distributed without differences in location (jaw) or material. A higher application force was found on the right side (p < 0.01). The number of peak forces was affected by side (p < 0.03), with less peaks on the left side. No significant differences were found in compressive strength when correlated to restoration location, participant, or material (p = 0.431). The stiffness values of Filtek (3729 ± 228 N/mm) were found to be 15% higher than Tetric (3248 ± 227 N/mm) (p < 0.005). No correlations were found between the compressive strength or stiffness and the amount of force applied during placement. Conclusions: The individual restoration material placement parameters did influence practitioner performance; however, these differences did not affect the mechanical properties of the final restoration.
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.