Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 2: Amalgam restorations – time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth

Key Points

  • Circa 7.3million amalgam restorations were included, of which 2.5million had a re-intervention at 15 years. Kaplan Meier Analysis revealed that, overall, 41% of amalgam restorations had not required a re-intervention at 15 years.

  • Larger restorations survived less well to re-intervention than small restorations, with similar findings for time to extraction of the restored tooth. The placement of a dentine pin in restorations resulted in poorer performance of restorations.

  • Amalgam restorations in younger patients performed better than those in older patients, both in terms of time to re-intervention and time to extraction of the restored tooth.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18

References

  1. 1

    Lucarotti P S K, Burke F J T . The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales: 1: methodology. Br.Dent.J 2018; In press.

  2. 2

    Information Centre for Health and Social Care, NHS Business Services Authority. Longitudinal Dental Treatment, 1990–2006. [data collection]. UK Data Service, 2012.

  3. 3

    Steele J G, O'Sulivan I . Adult Dental Health Survey 2009. London, Health and Social Care Information Centre.

  4. 4

    Fennis W M, Kuijs R H, Kreulen C M, Roeters F J, Creeugers N H, Burgersdijk R C . A survey of cusp fractures in a population of general denta practices. Int J Prosthodont 2002; 15: 559–563.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Patel D K, Burke F J T . Fractures of posterior teeth: a review and analysis of predisposing factors. Prim Dent Care 1995; 2: 6–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Saunders W P, Saunders E M . Prevalence of periradicular periodontitis associated with crowned teeth in an adult Scottish subpopulation. Br Dent J 1998; 185: 137–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Kidd E A, Fejerskov O, Nyvad B . Infected dentine revisited. Dent Update 2015; 42: 802–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Pallesen U, van Dijken J W V, Halken J, Hallonsten A-L, Hoigard R . Longevity of posterior composite in permanent teeth in Public Dental Health Service: A prospective 8 years follow up. J Dent 2013; 41: 297–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Burke F J T, Crisp R J, James A et al. Five year clinical evaluation of restorations placed in a low shrinkage stress composite in UK general dental practices. Eur J Prosthodont Rest Dent 2017; 25: 108–114.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Lucarotti P S K, Holder R L, Burke F J T . Outcome of direct restorations placed within the General Dental Services in England and Wales (Part 1): Variation by type of restoration and re-intervention. J Dent 2005; 33: 805–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Brunton P A, Burke F J T, Sharif M O et al. Contemporary dental practice in the UK in 2008: aspects of direct restorations, endodontics and bleaching. Br Dent J 2012; 212: 63–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Deligedorgi V, Mjor I A, Wilson N H F . An overview for reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations. Prim Dent Care 2001; 8: 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Burke F J T, Rivagi V, Mackenzie L, Priest N, Falcon H C . In vitro cavity and crown preparations and direct restorations carried out by Foundation Dentists (FDs) in the Oxford and Wessex Deaneries: A comparison of performance at the start and end of the FD programme. Br Dent J 2017; 222: 605–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Lucarotti P S K, Holder R L, Burke F J T . Outcome of direct restorations placed within the general dental services in England and Wales (Part 3): Variation by dentist factors. J Dent 2005; 33: 827–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the support of the Economic and Social Data Service, the Health and Social Care Information Centre and the NHS Business Services Authority for collating and releasing this valuable data resource.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. J. T. Burke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Burke, F., Lucarotti, P. The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 2: Amalgam restorations – time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 224, 789–800 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.354

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links