Circa 1.6million Glass Ionomer (GI) restorations were included, these being placed in class II and class V cavities. Of these, circa 700,000 had a re-intervention at 15 years. Kaplan Meier Analysis revealed that, overall, only 28% of GI restorations had survived without re-intervention at 15 years.
GI restorations performed less well than other treatment groups overall, both in terms of time to re-intervention and also time to extraction of the restored tooth, with 23% of GI-restored teeth being extracted at 15 years.
GI restorations performed better in younger patients than in older patients and performed least well when placed in upper incisor teeth: the performance of GI restorations was highly tooth-dependent.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $20.79 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
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.
Wilson A D, Kent B E . A new translucent cement for dentistry. The glass ionomer cement. Br Dent J 1972; 132: 133–135.
Combe E C, Burke F J T, Douglas W H . Dental Biomaterials. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
Dental Practice Board. Digest of Statistics, April 2004 – March 2005. Eastbourne UK: Dental Practice Board, 2005.
Randall R C, Wilson N H F . Glass ionomer restoratives: A systematic review of a secondary caries treatment effect. J Dent Res 1999; 78: 628–637.
3M ESPE Ketac Molar Quick Product Brochure. Available at http://solutions.3mae.ae/wps/portal/3M/en_AE/3M_ESPE/Dental-Manufacturers/Products/Dental-Restorative-Materials/ (accessed May 2018).
Dentsply De Trey GmbH Professional Research. Chemflex Technical Manual. p 25. Germany: Dentsply De Trey, 1998.
Information Centre for Health and Social Care, NHS Business Services Authority. Longitudinal Dental Treatment, 1990–2006. [data collection]. UK Data Service, 2012.
Levitch L C, Bader J D, Shugars D A, Heymann H O . Non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 1994; 22: 195–207.
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.
Steele J G, O'Sulivan I . Adult Dental Health Survey 2009. London: Health and Social Care Information Centre, 2009.
Stewardson D A, Creanor S, Thornley P et al. The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice: Part 3, five year survival. Br Dent J 2012; 212: E14.
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.
About this article
Cite this article
Burke, F., Lucarotti, P. The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 3: Glass ionomer restorations – time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 224, 865–874 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.436
Brazilian Dental Journal (2020)
The role of the randomised controlled trial in restorative dentistry and the correct purpose of observational data
British Dental Journal (2019)
Electronic primary dental care records in research: A case study of validation and quality assurance strategies
International Journal of Medical Informatics (2019)
The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 9: incisor teeth: restoration time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth
British Dental Journal (2018)