Cost-effectiveness of composite resins and amalgam in the replacement of amalgam Class II restorations

Five-year survival of class II restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the survival of class II composite restorations in premolars and molars with and without base bulk-fill composite in general dental practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected data from the electronic patient files of the Public Dental Services in the City of Oulu, Finland. The timespan of data collection was from August 15th, 2002, to August 9th, 2018. The data consisted of class II composite restorations both with and without base bulk-fill composite. We compared the survival of these restorations using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, the log-rank test, survival rates, and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.

RESULTS

We observed 297 restorations in 96 patients. The five-year survival rates for restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite were comparable in premolars (77.5% and 77.4%, respectively) but different in molars (69.9% and 57.8%, respectively, p = 0.069). In molars, the restorations with base bulk-fill composite exhibited a higher survival rate in 14 patients, whereas in 11 patients the restorations without base bulk-fill composites exhibited a higher survival rate. In 24 patients the survival rates were similar for restorations with and without the base bulk-fill composite (p = 0.246).

CONCLUSIONS

The restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite had similar longevity.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Base bulk-fill composites are safe to use in general practice due to their similar survival rates compared to conventional composites.

Alternative Direct Restorative Materials for Dental Amalgam: A Concise Review Based on an FDI Policy Statement

Dental restorative procedures remain a cornerstone of dental practice, and for many decades, dental amalgam was the most frequently employed material. However, its use is declining, mainly driven by its poor aesthetics and by the development of tooth-coloured adhesive materials. Furthermore, the Minamata Convention agreed on a phase-down on the use of dental amalgam. This concise review is based on a FDI Policy Statement which provides guidance on the selection of direct restorative materials as alternatives to amalgam. The Policy Statement was informed by current literature, identified mainly from PubMed and the internet. Ultimately, dental, oral, and patient factors should be considered when choosing the best material for each individual case. Dental factors include the dentition, tooth type, and cavity class and extension; oral aspects comprise caries risk profiles and related risk factors; and patient-related aspects include systemic risks/medical conditions such as allergies towards certain materials as well as compliance. Special protective measures (eg, a no-touch technique, blue light protection) are required when handling resin-based materials, and copious water spray is recommended when adjusting or removing restorative materials. Cost and reimbursement policies may need to be considered when amalgam alternatives are used, and the material recommendation requires the informed consent of the patient. There is no single material which can replace amalgam in all applications; different materials are needed for different situations. The policy statement recommends using a patient-centred rather than purely a material-centred approach. Further research is needed to improve overall material properties, the clinical performance, the impact on the environment, and cost-effectiveness of all alternative materials.

Degradation and Failure Phenomena at the Dentin Bonding Interface

Damage in the bonding interface is a significant factor that leads to premature failure of dental bonded restorations. The imperfectly bonded dentin-adhesive interface is susceptible to hydrolytic degradation and bacterial and enzyme attack, severely jeopardizing restorations' longevity. Developing caries around previously made restorations, also called "recurrent or secondary caries," is a significant health problem. The replacement of restorations is the most prevailing treatment in dental clinics, leading to the so-called "tooth death spiral". In other words, every time a restoration is replaced, more tooth tissue is removed, increasing the size of the restorations until the tooth is eventually lost. This process leads to high financial costs and detriment to patients' quality of life. Since the complexity of the oral cavity makes prevention a challenging task, novel strategies in Dental Materials and Operative fields are required. This article briefly overviews the physiological dentin substrate, features of dentin bonding, challenges and clinical relevance. We discussed the anatomy of the dental bonding interface, aspects of the degradation at the resin-dentin interface, extrinsic and intrinsic factors affecting dental bonding longevity, perspectives on resin and collagen degradation and how these subjects are connected. In this narrative review, we also outlined the recent progress in overcoming dental bonding challenges through bioinspiration, nanotechnology and advanced techniques to reduce degradation and improve dental bonding longevity.

Resin Composites in Posterior Teeth: Clinical Performance and Direct Restorative Techniques

Resin composites are the most versatile restorative materials used in dentistry and the first choice for restoring posterior teeth. This article reviews aspects that influence the clinical performance of composite restorations and addresses clinically relevant issues regarding different direct techniques for restoring posterior teeth that could be performed in varied clinical situations. The article discusses the results of long-term clinical trials with resin composites and the materials available in the market for posterior restorations. The importance of photoactivation is presented, including aspects concerning the improvement of the efficiency of light-curing procedures. With regard to the restorative techniques, the article addresses key elements and occlusion levels for restoring Class I and Class II cavities, in addition to restorative strategies using different shades/opacities of resin composites in incremental techniques, restorations using bulk-fill composites, and shade-matching composites.

Public Valuation of Direct Restorations: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Direct posterior dental restorations are commonly provided following management of dental caries. Amalgam use has been phased down and the feasibility of a phase-out by 2030 is being explored. Alternative direct restorative materials differ in their outcomes and provision. This research aimed to elicit the UK population's preferences for different attributes of restorations and their willingness to pay (WTP) for restorative services and outcomes. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was designed with patient and public involvement and distributed to a representative sample of the UK general population using an online survey. Respondents answered 17 choice tasks between pairs of scenarios that varied in levels of 7 attributes (wait for filling, clinician type, filling color, length of procedure, likely discomfort after filling, average life span of filling, and cost). An opt-out (no treatment) was included. Mixed logit models were used for data analysis. Marginal WTP for attribute levels and relative attribute importance were calculated. In total, 1,002 respondents completed the DCE. Overall, respondents were willing to pay £39.52 to reduce a 6-wk wait for treatment to 2 wk, £13.55 to have treatment by a dentist rather than a therapist, £41.66 to change filling color from silvery/gray to white, £0.27 per minute of reduced treatment time, £116.52 to move from persistent to no postoperative pain, and £5.44 per year of increased restoration longevity. Ability to pay affected willingness to pay, with low-income respondents more likely to opt out of treatment and value restoration color (white) and increased longevity significantly lower than those with higher income. Clinicians should understand potential drivers of restoration choice, so they can be discussed with individual patients to obtain consent. It is important that policy makers consider general population preferences for restorative outcomes and services, with an awareness of how income affects these, when considering the potential phase-out of amalgam restorations.

Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent posterior teeth

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, amalgam has been used for filling cavities in posterior teeth, and it continues to be the restorative material of choice in some low- and middle-income countries due to its effectiveness and relatively low cost. However, there are concerns over the use of amalgam restorations (fillings) with regard to mercury release in the body and the environmental impact of mercury disposal. Dental composite resin materials are an aesthetic alternative to amalgam, and their mechanical properties have developed sufficiently to make them suitable for restoring posterior teeth. Nevertheless, composite resin materials may have potential for toxicity to human health and the environment. The United Nations Environment Programme has established the Minamata Convention on Mercury, which is an international treaty that aims "to protect the [sic] human health and the environment from anthropogenic emissions and releases of mercury and mercury compounds". It entered into force in August 2017, and as of February 2021 had been ratified by 127 governments. Ratification involves committing to the adoption of at least two of nine proposed measures to phase down the use of mercury, including amalgam in dentistry. In light of this, we have updated a review originally published in 2014, expanding the scope of the review by undertaking an additional search for harms outcomes. Our review synthesises the results of studies that evaluate the long-term effectiveness and safety of amalgam versus composite resin restorations, and evaluates the level of certainty we can have in that evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects (i.e. efficacy and safety) of direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched five bibliographic databases up to 16 February 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies SELECTION CRITERIA: To assess efficacy, we included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dental composite resin with amalgam restorations in permanent posterior teeth that assessed restoration failure or survival at follow-up of at least three years. To assess safety, we sought non-randomised studies in addition to RCTs that directly compared composite resin and amalgam restorative materials and measured toxicity, sensitivity, allergy, or injury.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of eight studies in this updated review, all of which were RCTs. Two studies used a parallel-group design, and six used a split-mouth design. We judged all of the included studies to be at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding and issues related to unit of analysis. We identified one new trial since the previous version of this review (2014), as well as eight additional papers that assessed safety, all of which related to the two parallel-group studies that were already included in the review. For our primary meta-analyses, we combined data from the two parallel-group trials, which involved 1645 composite restorations and 1365 amalgam restorations in 921 children. We found low-certainty evidence that composite resin restorations had almost double the risk of failure compared to amalgam restorations (risk ratio (RR) 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52 to 2.35; P < 0.001), and were at much higher risk of secondary caries (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.67 to 2.74; P < 0.001). We found low-certainty evidence that composite resin restorations were not more likely to result in restoration fracture (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.64; P = 0.66). Six trials used a split-mouth design. We considered these studies separately, as their reliability was compromised due to poor reporting, unit of analysis errors, and variability in methods and findings. Subgroup analysis showed that the findings were consistent with the results of the parallel-group studies. Three trials investigated possible harms of dental restorations. Higher urinary mercury levels were reported amongst children with amalgam restorations in two trials, but the levels were lower than what is known to be toxic. Some differences between amalgam and composite resin groups were observed on certain measures of renal, neuropsychological, and psychosocial function, physical development, and postoperative sensitivity; however, no consistent or clinically important harms were found. We considered that the vast number of comparisons made false-positive results likely. There was no evidence of differences between the amalgam and composite resin groups in neurological symptoms, immune function, and urinary porphyrin excretion. The evidence is of very low certainty, with most harms outcomes reported in only one trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests that composite resin restorations may have almost double the failure rate of amalgam restorations. The risk of restoration fracture does not seem to be higher with composite resin restorations, but there is a much higher risk of developing secondary caries. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that there may be no clinically important differences in the safety profile of amalgam compared with composite resin dental restorations. This review supports the utility of amalgam restorations, and the results may be particularly useful in parts of the world where amalgam is still the material of choice to restore posterior teeth with proximal caries. Of note, however, is that composite resin materials have undergone important improvements in the years since the trials informing the primary analyses for this review were conducted. The global phase-down of dental amalgam via the Minamata Convention on Mercury is an important consideration when deciding between amalgam and composite resin dental materials. The choice of which dental material to use will depend on shared decision-making between dental providers and patients in the clinic setting, and local directives and protocols.

Threats to adhesive/dentin interfacial integrity and next generation bio-enabled multifunctional adhesives

Nearly 100 million of the 170 million composite and amalgam restorations placed annually in the United States are replacements for failed restorations. The primary reason both composite and amalgam restorations fail is recurrent decay, for which composite restorations experience a 2.0-3.5-fold increase compared to amalgam. Recurrent decay is a pernicious problem-the standard treatment is replacement of defective composites with larger restorations that will also fail, initiating a cycle of ever-larger restorations that can lead to root canals, and eventually, to tooth loss. Unlike amalgam, composite lacks the inherent capability to seal discrepancies at the restorative material/tooth interface. The low-viscosity adhesive that bonds the composite to the tooth is intended to seal the interface, but the adhesive degrades, which can breach the composite/tooth margin. Bacteria and bacterial by-products such as acids and enzymes infiltrate the marginal gaps and the composite's inability to increase the interfacial pH facilitates cariogenic and aciduric bacterial outgrowth. Together, these characteristics encourage recurrent decay, pulpal damage, and composite failure. This review article examines key biological and physicochemical interactions involved in the failure of composite restorations and discusses innovative strategies to mitigate the negative effects of pathogens at the adhesive/dentin interface. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 107B:2466-2475, 2019.

Perinatal death and exposure to dental amalgam fillings during pregnancy in the population-based MoBa cohort

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to gain knowledge regarding the risk of perinatal death related to exposure to dental amalgam fillings in the mother.

DESIGN

Population-based observational cohort study.

SETTING

The Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study, a Norwegian birth cohort of children born in 1999-2008 conducted by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health.

PARTICIPANTS

72,038 pregnant women with data on the number of teeth filled with dental amalgam.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Data on perinatal death (stillbirth ≥ 22 weeks plus early neonatal death 0-7 days after birth) were obtained from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway.

RESULTS

The absolute risk of perinatal death ranged from 0.20% in women with no amalgam-filled teeth to 0.67% in women with 13 or more teeth filled with amalgam. Analyses including the number of teeth filled with amalgam as a continuous variable indicated an increased risk of perinatal death by increasing number of teeth filled with dental amalgam (crude OR 1.065, 95% CI 1.034 to 1.098, p<0.001). After adjustment for potential confounders (mothers' age, education, body mass index, parity, smoking during pregnancy, alcohol consumption during pregnancy) included as categorical variables, there was still an increased risk for perinatal death associated with increasing number of teeth filled with amalgam (ORadj 1.041, 95% CI 1.008 to 1.076, p = 0.015). By an increased exposure from 0 to 16 teeth filled with amalgam, the model predicted an almost doubled odds ratio (ORadj 1.915, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.28). In groups with 1 to 12 teeth filled with amalgam the adjusted odds ratios were slightly, but not significantly, increased. The group with the highest exposure (participants with 13 or more teeth filled with amalgam) had an adjusted OR of 2.34 (95% CI 1.27 to 4.32; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

The current findings suggest that the risk of perinatal death could increase in a dose-dependent way based on the mother's number of teeth filled with dental amalgam. However, we cannot exclude that the relatively modest odds ratios could be a result of residual confounding. Additional studies on the relationship between exposure to dental amalgam fillings during pregnancy and perinatal death are warranted.

Policy Development Fosters Collaborative Practice: The Example of the Minamata Convention on Mercury

This article provides an example of interprofessional collaboration for policy development regarding environmental global health vis-à-vis the Minamata Convention on Mercury. It presents an overview of mercury and mercury-related environmental health issues; public policy processes and stakeholders; and specifics including organized dentistry's efforts to create global policy to restrict environmental contamination by mercury. Dentistry must participate in interprofessional collaborations and build on such experiences to be optimally placed for ongoing interprofessional policy development. Current areas requiring dental engagement for interprofessional policy development include education, disaster response, HPV vaccination, pain management, research priorities, and antibiotic resistance.

Failure rate of single-unit restorations on posterior vital teeth: A systematic review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

No knowledge synthesis exists concerning when to use a direct restoration versus a complete-coverage indirect restoration in posterior vital teeth.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the failure rate of conventional single-unit tooth-supported restorations in posterior permanent vital teeth as a function of remaining tooth structure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Four databases were searched electronically, and 8 selected journals were searched manually up to February 2015. Clinical studies of tooth-supported single-unit restorative treatments with a mean follow-up period of at least 3 years were selected. The outcome measured was the restorations' clinical or radiological failure. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the Cochrane Collaboration procedures for randomized control trials, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology criteria for observational studies, 2 reviewers independently applied eligibility criteria, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the evidence of the included studies using the American Association of Critical Care Nurses' system. The weighted-mean group 5-year failure rates of the restorations were reported according to the type of treatment and remaining tooth structure. A metaregression model was used to assess the correlation between the number of remaining tooth walls and the weighted-mean 5-year failure rates.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials and 9 observational studies were included and their quality ranged from low to moderate. These studies included a total of 358 crowns, 4804 composite resins, and 303582 amalgams. Data obtained from the randomized controlled trials showed that, regardless of the amount of remaining tooth structure, amalgams presented better outcomes than composite resins. Furthermore, in teeth with fewer than 2 remaining walls, high-quality observational studies demonstrated that crowns were better than amalgams. A clear inverse correlation was found between the amount of remaining tooth structure and restoration failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient high-quality data are available to support one restorative treatment or material over another for the restoration of vital posterior teeth. However, the current evidence suggests that the failure rates of treatments may depend on the amount of remaining tooth structure and types of treatment.

Intraoral Repair of Direct and Indirect Restorations: Procedures and Guidelines

The service life of defective direct or indirect restorations could be prolonged by repair or relayering actions where durable adhesion of resin-based composite materials is established for longevity of repairs. The advances in adhesive technologies have introduced several surface conditioning concepts to adhere resin composites onto different restorative materials. The purpose of this report is to summarize reasons for failure, survival of repaired reconstructions, elaborate upon types and mechanisms of available surface conditioning methods, and present operative dentists with practical guidelines for intraoral repair procedures.

Clinical Decision Making on Extensive Molar Restorations

Extensive loss of posterior tooth substance, which traditionally was restored with amalgam or indirect restorations, is more commonly being restored with resin-based composite restorations. Using a questionnaire, we aimed to survey dentists' clinical decision making when restoring extensive defects in posterior molar teeth. The questionnaire, which included questions on background information from the dentists, clinical cases with treatment options, and general questions about restoring extensive posterior defects, was sent to 476 dentists. The response rate was 59%. Multiple logistic regressions were used to investigate the different associations. Most of the respondents preferred a direct composite restoration when one cusp was missing, while indirect restorations were most preferred when replacing three or four cusps. Younger dentists and dentists working in the private sector had a greater tendency to choose an indirect technique compared with older colleagues. Generally, the most important influencing factor in clinical decision making was the amount of remaining tooth substance. Factors that appeared to be less important were dental advertisements, use of fluoride, and dietary habits. Female dentists perceived factors such as oral hygiene, patient requests, and economy to be more important than did their male colleagues.

Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent or adult posterior teeth

BACKGROUND

Amalgam has been the traditional material for filling cavities in posterior teeth for the last 150 years and, due to its effectiveness and cost, amalgam is still the restorative material of choice in certain parts of the world. In recent times, however, there have been concerns over the use of amalgam restorations (fillings), relating to the mercury release in the body and the environmental impact following its disposal. Resin composites have become an esthetic alternative to amalgam restorations and there has been a remarkable improvement of its mechanical properties to restore posterior teeth.There is need to review new evidence comparing the effectiveness of both restorations.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent posterior teeth, primarily on restoration failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 22 October 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 9), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 22 October 2013), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 22 October 2013), and LILACs via BIREME Virtual Health Library (1980 to 22 October 2013). We applied no restrictions on language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. We contacted manufacturers of dental materials to obtain any unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing dental resin composites with dental amalgams in permanent posterior teeth. We excluded studies having a follow-up period of less than three years.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 2205 retrieved references, we included seven trials (10 articles) in the systematic review. Two trials were parallel group studies involving 1645 composite restorations and 1365 amalgam restorations (921 children) in the analysis. The other five trials were split-mouth studies involving 1620 composite restorations and 570 amalgam restorations in an unclear number of children. Due to major problems with the reporting of the data for the five split-mouth trials, the primary analysis is based on the two parallel group trials. We judged all seven trials to be at high risk of bias and we analyzed 3265 composite restorations and 1935 amalgam restorations.The parallel group trials indicated that resin restorations had a significantly higher risk of failure than amalgam restorations (risk ratio (RR) 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52 to 2.35, P value < 0.001 (fixed-effect model) (low-quality evidence)) and increased risk of secondary caries (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.67 to 2.74, P value < 0.001 (low-quality evidence)) but no evidence of an increased risk of restoration fracture (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.64, P value = 0.66 (moderate-quality evidence)). The results from the split-mouth trials were consistent with those of the parallel group trials.Adverse effects of dental restorations were reported in two trials. The outcomes considered were neurobehavioral function, renal function, psychosocial function, and physical development. The investigators found no difference in adverse effects between composite and amalgam restorations. However, the results should be interpreted with caution as none of the outcomes were reported in more than one trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence to suggest that resin composites lead to higher failure rates and risk of secondary caries than amalgam restorations. This review reinforces the benefit of amalgam restorations and the results are particularly useful in parts of the world where amalgam is still the material of choice to restore posterior teeth with proximal caries. Though the review found insufficient evidence to support or refute any adverse effects amalgam may have on patients, new research is unlikely to change opinion on its safety and due to the decision for a global phase-down of amalgam (Minamata Convention on Mercury) general opinion on its safety is unlikely to change.

Adhesive/Dentin interface: the weak link in the composite restoration

Results from clinical studies suggest that more than half of the 166 million dental restorations that were placed in the United States in 2005 were replacements for failed restorations. This emphasis on replacement therapy is expected to grow as dentists use composite as opposed to dental amalgam to restore moderate to large posterior lesions. Composite restorations have higher failure rates, more recurrent caries, and increased frequency of replacement as compared to amalgam. Penetration of bacterial enzymes, oral fluids, and bacteria into the crevices between the tooth and composite undermines the restoration and leads to recurrent decay and premature failure. Under in vivo conditions the bond formed at the adhesive/dentin interface can be the first defense against these noxious, damaging substances. The intent of this article is to review structural aspects of the clinical substrate that impact bond formation at the adhesive/dentin interface; to examine physico-chemical factors that affect the integrity and durability of the adhesive/dentin interfacial bond; and to explore how these factors act synergistically with mechanical forces to undermine the composite restoration. The article will examine the various avenues that have been pursued to address these problems and it will explore how alterations in material chemistry could address the detrimental impact of physico-chemical stresses on the bond formed at the adhesive/dentin interface.

Finnish dentists' perceptions of the longevity of direct dental restorations

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate Finnish dentists' perceptions of the longevity of direct dental restorations; to assess the possible impacts of dentists' characteristics on these perceptions; and to compare the present longevity estimates with those of recent European reports.

METHODS

A questionnaire to 592 general practitioners, systematically sampled from the Finnish Dental Association's membership list, was posted in April 2004 and data collection was finished by the end of June. The question "In general, what is your estimate for the mean age of restoration in permanent teeth?" pointed restorations: Class II and MOD composites and amalgam in a posterior tooth and Class III composites in an incisor. Dentists' gender, main work, and year of graduation served as background information. Of the 339 (57%) respondents, only public and private dentists were included; 11 were excluded. Three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for recent reports on restoration longevity. Statistical evaluation was by one-way ANOVA, with p=0.05 as the level of significance.

RESULTS

The mean of the estimates for all types of composite was 9.0 years (SD 3.6; 95% CI 8.6-9.3) and 18.7 years for amalgam (SD 7.3; 95% CI 18.0-19.5). Male dentists gave longer estimates than female dentists for posterior composites, but shorter estimates for amalgam. Compared to public dentists, private dentists gave longer estimates for posterior composites. All estimates were longer than those reported in the recent literature.

CONCLUSION

Dentists' perceptions of posterior composite longevity are significantly longer among males than among females and among private than public sector dentists, and exceed the median longevity reported in recent studies.

Costs and prices of single dental fillings in Europe: a micro-costing study

Dental fillings represent an established procedure to treat tooth decay. The present paper provides a cost comparison of dental filling procedures across nine European countries. More specifically, the paper aims to estimate the costs and prices (i.e. reimbursement fees) of a single dental filling procedure in an approximately 12-year-old child with a toothache in a lower molar who presents at a dental practice, as described in a case vignette. Both amalgam and composite fillings were examined. Total costs were determined by identifying resource use and unit costs for the following cost components: diagnostic procedures, labour, materials, drugs, and overheads. Altogether, 49 practices provided data for the cost calculations. Mean total costs per country varied considerably, ranging from 8 euros to 156 euros. Labour costs were the most important cost driver in all practices, comprising 58% of total costs. Overhead costs were the second-most important cost component in the majority of countries. Actual cost differences across practices within countries were relatively small. Cost variations between countries were primarily due to differences in unit costs, especially for labour and overheads, and only to a lesser extent to differences in resource use. Finally, cost estimates for a single dental filling procedure based on reimbursement fees led to an underestimation of the total costs by approximately 50%.

Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Failure of dental restorations is a major concern in dental practice. Replacement of failed restorations constitutes the majority of operative work. Clinicians should be aware of the longevity of, and likely reasons for the failure of, direct posterior restorations. In a long-term, randomized clinical trial, the authors compared the longevity of amalgam and composite. SUBJECTS, METHODS AND MATERIALS: The authors randomly assigned one-half of the 472 subjects, whose age ranged from 8 through 12 years, to receive amalgam restorations in posterior teeth and the other one-half to receive resin-based composite restorations. Study dentists saw subjects annually to conduct follow-up oral examinations and take bitewing radiographs. Restorations needing replacement were failures. The dentists recorded differential reasons for restoration failure.

RESULTS

Subjects received a total of 1,748 restorations at baseline, which the authors followed for up to seven years. Overall, 10.1 percent of the baseline restorations failed. The survival rate of the amalgam restorations was 94.4 percent; that of composite restorations was 85.5 percent. Annual failure rates ranged from 0.16 to 2.83 percent for amalgam restorations and from 0.94 to 9.43 percent for composite restorations. Secondary caries was the main reason for failure in both materials. Risk of secondary caries was 3.5 times greater in the composite group.

CONCLUSION

Amalgam restorations performed better than did composite restorations. The difference in performance was accentuated in large restorations and in those with more than three surfaces involved.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Use of amalgam appears to be preferable to use of composites in multisurface restorations of large posterior teeth if longevity is the primary criterion in material selection.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Large Amalgam and Crown Restorations Over a 10-Year Period

OBJECTIVE

To assist clinical decision making for an individual patient or on a community level, this study was done to determine the differences in costs and effectiveness of large amalgams and crowns over 5 and 10 years when catastrophic subsequent treatment (root canal therapy or extraction) was the outcome.

METHODS

Administrative data for patients seen at the University of Iowa, College of Dentistry for 1735 large amalgam and crown restorations in 1987 or 1988 were used. Annual costs and effectiveness values were calculated. Costs of initial treatment (large amalgam or crown), and future treatments were determined, averaged and discounted. The effectiveness measure was defined as the number of years a tooth remained in a state free of catastrophic subsequent treatment. Years free of catastrophic treatment were averaged, and discounted. The years free of catastrophic treatment accounted for individuals who dropped out or withdrew from the study.

RESULTS

Teeth with crowns had higher effectiveness values at a much higher cost than teeth restored with large amalgams. The cost of an addition year free of catastrophic treatment for crowns was 1088.41 dollars at 5 years and 500.10 dollars at 10 years. Teeth in women had more favorable cost-effectiveness ratios than those in men, and teeth in the maxillary arch had more favorable cost-effectiveness ratios than teeth in the mandibular arch.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither the large amalgam or crown restoration had both the lowest cost and the highest effectiveness. The higher incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for crowns should be considered when making treatment decisions between large amalgam and crown restorations.

Characterization of photopolymerization of dentin adhesives as a function of light source and irradiance

Manufacturers have attempted to address the limitations associated with dentin bonding by eliminating as many steps as possible in the bonding protocol. Theoretically, this approach increases the efficiency of the procedure and reduces technique sensitivity. These trends are reflected in the introduction of all-in one, single-step adhesive systems; the increased concentration of acidic resin monomers in these systems allows for simultaneous etching and priming of the prepared dentin surface. Ideally, the degree of monomer conversion would be high enough that the acidic reaction would be self-limiting. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of light irradiance and source on the photopolymerization of three commercial dental adhesives by monitoring the double bond conversion as a function of time during and after irradiation. The photopolymerization curing efficiency of the commercial adhesives investigated in this study varied as a function of light source and distance. The use of LED performed better than the halogen light in terms of polymerization rate and degree of conversion for the commercial single-step, sixth generation adhesive, Adper Prompt. In contrast, polymerization of commercial single-bottle, fifth generation adhesive, Single Bond and One-Up Bond F, was mainly a function of exposure time, irrespective of the two light units or intensities.

2-year Clinical Evaluation of Alternative Treatments to Replacement of Defective Amalgam Restorations

Repair offers the most conservative and predictable results for the treatment of amalgam restorations with inadequate marginal adaptation and anatomic form.

Interfacial chemistry of class II composite restoration: structure analysis

The gingival margins of class II composite restorations are particularly vulnerable to marginal leakage and secondary caries. In identifying the factors contributing to caries development, the molecular structure and differences in the structure at the proximal and gingival margins have been largely overlooked. The purpose of this study was to compare the molecular structure at the adhesive/dentin interface of the proximal and gingival walls of class II composite restorations. Class II preparations were cut in 12 unerupted third molars with a water-cooled high-speed dental handpiece. The prepared teeth were randomly selected for treatment with Single Bond (SB) + Z100 (3M). Teeth were restored, per manufacturer's directions, under humidity and temperature characteristic of the oral cavity. Restored teeth were kept in sterile Delbecco's phosphate saline for 48 h. The samples were sectioned occluso-gingivally and micro-Raman spectra were acquired at approximately 1.5-microm spatial resolution across the composite/adhesive/dentin interfaces. Samples were wet throughout spectral acquisition. Raman spectral characteristics at the proximal and gingival margins were distinctly different; the depth of demineralized dentin was 6-7 microm at proximal margin, 12-13 microm at gingival margin. SB adhesive penetrated the depth of demineralized dentin in a gradient at the proximal margin. The "single bottle" adhesive used in this study, gradually penetrated the depth of the demineralized dentin at the proximal margin but failed to infiltrate the depth at the gingival margin, leaving a thick exposed collagen layer.

Evaluation of performance of dental providers on posterior restorations: does experience matter? A data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach

The purpose of this study is to discern what factors affect the longevity of amalgam and of composite restorations by dentists who perform posterior restorations. Data are obtained from the Washington Dental Service and contain 1.5 million patient encounters representing visits to 23,000 providers from January 1993 through 31 December 1999. Analysis of provider performance is estimated through Data Envelopment Analysis. The principal finding is that the most efficient dentists produce posterior restorations that survive almost 5 months (4.6 months) longer than those by inefficient providers (chi2 = 18.98, p < 0.0001). The findings suggest that there is no difference in restoration longevity between amalgam and composite restorations when the restoration is performed by efficient provider.