ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To assess the methodological quality of published systematic reviews relating to all ceramic implant frameworks, abutments and restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Published systematic reviews relating to all ceramic implant restorations for single tooth and multiple teeth replacements were retrieved to assess their methodological qualities. Sixteen systematic reviews were included for methodological quality assessment by two independent assessors using AMSTAR-2 critical appraisal tool. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using the weighted Cohen's Kappa statistic. RESULTS: Most systematic reviews included randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized studies of intervention. The majority of included systematic reviews (15 out of 16) scored critically low on quality with more than one critical flaw when assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool. Most systematic reviews assessed lacked analysis of the effects of the risk of bias and heterogeneity of the included studies. The inter-rater agreement of the independent assessors was substantial (0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Confidence in the evidence presented in these systematic reviews was undermined by their tendency to overlook the effect of risk of bias and heterogeneity in evidence synthesis.
Subject(s)
Dental Implants , CeramicsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the color difference values that represent the perceptibility and acceptability thresholds of denture teeth. METHODS: Eighteen interchangeable right upper central incisors denture teeth were selected to have color difference values from representative left upper central incisor denture tooth in a range of 0.4-11.4 ΔE* units measured with a spectrophotometer (CM 2600d, Minolta Konica, Japan). These teeth were placed in an artificial dental arch in a phantom head. Under controlled conditions, a total of 80 observers divided into 4 groups (technicians, nurses, dentists and researchers) were asked to report the perceptibility and acceptability of each of the color difference values. The findings was then analysed using logistic regression for determining the perceptible and acceptable thresholds of dental color differences. RESULTS: The determined color difference values at which 50% of all observers could detect a color difference (50:50 probability) was 1.9 ΔE* units with a 95% confidence interval and ranged from 1.7 ΔE* units to 2.1 ΔE* units. The determined color difference value at which 50% of all observes preferred to replace the tooth because of unacceptable color difference (50:50 probability) was 4.2 with a 95% confidence interval that ranged from 3.9 ΔE* units to 4.7 ΔE* units. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitation of this study, the following conclusions were made: 1. The mean color perceptibility threshold was significantly lower than the mean color acceptability threshold. 2. Significant differences between different observers groups were noticed in determination of perceptibility and acceptability of color differences. The technicians groups displayed lower perceptibility and acceptability limits than the dental nurses and non-dental observers. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: When shade matching artificial denture teeth to natural teeth, 50:50 perceptibility (1.9 ΔE* units) and acceptability (4.2 ΔE* units) thresholds are used to compare color difference values. The technicians group displayed lower perceptibility and acceptability limits than other observers.
Subject(s)
Color Perception , Esthetics, Dental , Prosthesis Coloring , Tooth, Artificial , Adult , Dental Assistants/psychology , Dental Technicians/psychology , Dentists/psychology , Discrimination, Psychological , Female , Humans , Incisor , Logistic Models , Male , Maxilla , Middle Aged , Observer Variation , Research Personnel/psychology , Sensory ThresholdsABSTRACT
This investigation aimed to evaluate the colour difference between metal ceramic restorations and their corresponding shades and any reasons for a colour mismatch in the dental laboratory. The colour of 50 consecutive metal ceramic restorations produced in a laboratory was measured using a spectrophotometer and compared to the shade tabs. Colour reproduction was optimal at porcelain thicknesses between 1.4-1.6 mm, varied between technicians within the same laboratory and was better for shades in the 2M group. Most crowns were above the threshold for a clinically acceptable shade match and almost all crowns were lighter than the corresponding shade tab.
Subject(s)
Crowns , Dental Audit , Dental Porcelain/chemistry , Denture, Partial, Fixed , Metal Ceramic Alloys/chemistry , Prosthesis Coloring/standards , Color , Dental Prosthesis Design , Denture Design , Humans , Laboratories, Dental , Prosthesis Coloring/instrumentation , Spectrophotometry , Surface PropertiesABSTRACT
This paper describes a sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) incident occurring during routine endodontic treatment of a patient who presented with chronic periapical periodontitis of a maxillary canine tooth and discusses the immediate and late treatment of this case.
Subject(s)
Periapical Tissue/drug effects , Root Canal Irrigants/adverse effects , Root Canal Therapy/adverse effects , Sodium Hypochlorite/adverse effects , Cuspid/pathology , Edema/chemically induced , Face/innervation , Facial Pain/chemically induced , Female , Humans , Hypesthesia/chemically induced , Injections/adverse effects , Maxilla , Middle Aged , Periapical Periodontitis/therapy , Root Canal Irrigants/administration & dosage , Root Canal Preparation/adverse effects , Sodium Hypochlorite/administration & dosageABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to compare detection of enamel and dentinal caries by dental students' and faculty members' visual inspection and by quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF). The overall aim was to determine whether QLF is an appropriate technique for use in clinical skills laboratories as a teaching aid for dental undergraduates to detect and assess the removal of enamel and dentinal caries. Sixty students who had no clinical experience with dental caries were asked to select . suitably decayed teeth and mount them in plaster. After recording baseline QLF images, students removed caries according to instructions given by the clinical tutor. On completion of the exercise, the teeth were visually determined to be caries-free by the student, then confirmed by the clinical tutor. A fluorescein in alcohol solution was injected into the cavity for two minutes, rinsed, and dried before QLF images were captured. The images were visually analyzed by two examiners for the presence or absence of caries. From seventy-four images recorded, seventeen were excluded due to exposure of the pulp chamber. The remaining fifty-seven teeth, which by clinical visual examination were judged to be caries-free, were examined using QLF. Fifty-three percent were found to be caries-free, while 47 percent were carious. In this sample of fifty-seven teeth judged to be caries-free by both dental students and faculty members, QLF thus detected caries in almost half of these teeth. These findings suggest that QLF is a useful, noninvasive, nondestructive technique for the detection of caries and can serve as an adjunct to chair-side diagnosis and management of dental caries, which is typically accomplished by visual inspection. QLF may be useful and appropriate as an objective clinical teaching aid for the assessment of dental caries.
