Research | Published:

Dental practice in the UK in 2015/2016. Part 3: aspects of indirect restorations and fixed prosthodontics

BDJ volume 226, pages 192196 (08 February 2019) | Download Citation

Key points

  • Explores current trends and practising habits of general dental practitioners in the UK with respect to materials and techniques used in provision of indirect restorations and fixed prostheses.

  • Increased number of clinicians prescribing minimally invasive, additive and retrievable treatment modalities.

  • Highlights significant departures from evidence-based, best available practice in some areas that might lead to suboptimal treatment outcomes.

Abstract

Objective

This paper reports data which helps identify changes and trends in the provision of indirect fixed prostheses in general dental practice in the UK. To determine by means of an anonymous, self-report questionnaire, the current trend in the provision of fixed prosthodontic treatments, with a special emphasis on the choice of treatment modalities, techniques and materials.

Methods

The data presented were extracted from the data obtained from a validated, 121-question questionnaire distributed at random to general dental practitioners in the UK attending postgraduate meetings in 2015/2016, with a wide distribution of locations.

Results

A response rate exceeding 66% was achieved. Amalgam and light-cured composite were the preferred material for core build-up of vital teeth for around 62% of the respondents. Dentine pins were still being used by 66% of the respondents. The vast majority of respondents (92%) used a post and core to restore root-treated teeth. Fibre posts were the most commonly used (63%) type of preformed post among the respondents. Using the opposing and adjacent teeth as a reference to control tooth structure reduction during vital tooth preparation was the most common method, used by 42% of the respondents. Addition-cured silicone impression materials were the most frequently used impression material (78%). The surveyed practitioners were equally split between precious and non-precious metals as the substructure for indirect restorations. Glass-ionomer luting cements (47%) and resin-based cements (52%) were the most commonly used to cement porcelain fused to metal and zirconia indirect restorations, respectively. Laboratory made aesthetic veneers were prescribed by half of the respondents, while a third of them preferred direct resin composite as a veneer material.

Conclusion

Within the limitations of the study, it was concluded that there has been an increase in the use of adhesive bonding and metal-free restorations. Amalgam and dentine pins continued to be used, contrary to international trends. Studies of the type reported are considered important in investigating trends and developments in dentistry.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , , , , , . Contemporary dental practice in the UK: demographic details and practising arrangements in 2008. Br Dent J 2012; 212: 11–15.

  2. 2.

    , , , , . Contemporary dental practice in the UK: Demographic data and practising arrangements. Br Dent J 2005; 198: 39–43.

  3. 3.

    , , , , . Contemporary dental practice in the UK: indirect restorations and fixed prosthodontics. Br Dent J 2005;198: 99–103.

  4. 4.

    , , , , . Contemporary dental practice in the UK in 2008: indirect restorations and fixed prosthodontics. Br Dent J 2012; 212:115–119.

  5. 5.

    , , , . Dental practice in the UK in 2015 -Part 1: demographic and practice arrangements. Br Dent J 2017; 226: 55–61.

  6. 6.

    , , , , , . Dental practice in the UK in 2015/2016. Part 2: aspects of direct restorations, bleaching, endodontics and paediatric dentistry. Br Dent J 2019; 10.1038/sj.bdj.2019.50.

  7. 7.

    Anonymous. Amalgam fillings to be phased down. Br Dent J 2013; 215: 383.

  8. 8.

    , . Managing the phase-down of amalgam: part II. Implications for practising arrangements and lessons from Norway. Br Dent J 2013; 215: 159–162.

  9. 9.

    , , , . Factors contributing to the incompatibility between simplified-step adhesives and chemically-cured or dual-cured composites. Part III. Effect of acidic resin monomers. J Adhes Dent 2003; 5: 267–282.

  10. 10.

    . Are dentine pins obsolete? Dent Update 2013; 40: 253–254, 256–268.

  11. 11.

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

  12. 12.

    , . An in vitro study of coronal microleakage in root-canal-treated teeth restored by the post and core technique. Int Endod J 1997; 30: 361–368.

  13. 13.

    , , . Fibre-based post systems: a review. Br Dent J 2003; 195: 43–48.

  14. 14.

    , , , , . Flexural properties of endodontic posts and human root dentin. Dent Mater 2007; 23:1129–1135.

  15. 15.

    , , . An amalgam coronal-radicular dowel and core technique for endodontically treated posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1980; 43: 511–515.

  16. 16.

    , , , , , . Ex vivo fracture resistance of direct resin composite complete crowns with and without posts on maxillary premolars. Int Endod J 2005; 38: 230–237.

  17. 17.

    , , . Survey of UK dentists regarding the use of CAD/CAM technology. Br Dent J 2016; 221: 639–644.

  18. 18.

    , , , , . Metal-ceramic bridges from commercial dental laboratories: alloy composition, cost and quality of fit. Br Dent J 1992; 172: 198–204.

  19. 19.

    , , . Crowns and extra-coronal restorations: materials selection. Br Dent J 2002; 192: 199–211.

  20. 20.

    , , . Ceramic steel? Nature 1975; 258: 703–704.

  21. 21.

    , , . An overview of zirconia ceramics: Basic properties and clinical applications. J Dent 2007; 35: 819–826.

  22. 22.

    , , . The clinical success of tooth- and implant-supported zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses. A systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2015; 42: 467–480.

  23. 23.

    , , et al. The effect of sandblasting and different primers on shear bond strength between yttria-tetragonal zirconia polycrystal ceramic and a self-adhesive resin cement. Oper Dent 2015; 40: 63–71.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Jordan University of Science & Technology, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Irbid, Jordan

    • A. A. Jum'ah
  2. Medical Statistics, Plymouth University Peninsula Schools of Medicine & Dentistry, Plymouth, UK

    • S. Creanor
  3. King's College London Dental Institute, London, UK

    • N. H. F. Wilson
  4. Primary Dental Care Research Group, University of Birmingham School of Dentistry, Birmingham, UK

    • F. J. T. Burke
  5. University of Otago, Sir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, Dunedin New Zealand.

    • P. A. Brunton

Authors

  1. Search for A. A. Jum'ah in:

  2. Search for S. Creanor in:

  3. Search for N. H. F. Wilson in:

  4. Search for F. J. T. Burke in:

  5. Search for P. A. Brunton in:

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. A. Jum'ah.

About this article

Publication history

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2019.95