Clinical evaluation of posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students of Kuwait University

Affiliations

01 January 2010

-

doi: 10.1159/000312717


Abstract

Objective: To investigate the survival rate over a 3-year period of posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students of Kuwait University.

Materials and methods: Posterior resin composite restorations placed by 5th-, 6th- and 7th-year dental students between 2004 and 2005 were evaluated. All patients with posterior composite restorations placed during this period of time were recalled. Of the 204 eligible patients, 139 attended the recall. 432 posterior resin composite restorations were evaluated clinically and radiographically according to the United States Public Health Service criteria. For each restoration, the survival time and/or reasons for failure were recorded. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the data at a statistically significant level of p < 0.05.

Results: At 3 years, the survival rate of the restorations was 95.1%, resulting in an annual failure rate of 1.7%. Recurrent caries was the most common cause of failure (71.4%). Oral hygiene and gender and age of the patient were the factors that affected the failure rate of the restoration (p < 0.05). Other factors such as tooth type and location, type of cavity, type of liner used and level of the student who performed the procedure did not affect the failure rate (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: Dental students of Kuwait University were able to place resin composite restorations in posterior teeth with a low annual failure rate. Recurrent caries was the most common cause of failure of posterior resin composite restorations. Oral hygiene was the most important factor in determining the survival of resin composite restorations.


Similar articles

Five-year clinical performance of posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students.

Opdam NJ, Loomans BA, Roeters FJ, Bronkhorst EM.J Dent. 2004 Jul;32(5):379-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2004.02.005.PMID: 15193786

Trends in material choice for direct restorations by final year students from University College Cork 2004-2009.

O'Sullivan CO, McKenna GJ, Burke FM.Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2012 Mar;20(1):31-4.PMID: 22474934

Effects of enamel-bonding, type of restoration, patient age and operator on the longevity of an anterior composite resin.

Smales RJ.Am J Dent. 1991 Jun;4(3):130-3.PMID: 1830747

Nine-year evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite open sandwich technique in Class II cavities.

Lindberg A, van Dijken JW, Lindberg M.J Dent. 2007 Feb;35(2):124-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2006.06.003. Epub 2006 Sep 7.PMID: 16956709 Clinical Trial.

[The future of dental amalgam].

Opdam NJ.Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2005 Oct;112(10):373-5.PMID: 16300323 Dutch.


Cited by

Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced composite crowns in pulp-treated primary molars: 12-month results.

Mohammadzadeh Z, Parisay I, Mehrabkhani M, Madani AS, Mazhari F.Eur J Dent. 2016 Oct-Dec;10(4):522-528. doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.195177.PMID: 28042269 Free PMC article.

Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: a 3-year study.

Çelik Ç, Arhun N, Yamanel K.Med Princ Pract. 2014;23(5):453-9. doi: 10.1159/000364874. Epub 2014 Aug 12.PMID: 25115230 Free PMC article.

Direct and transdentinal (indirect) antibacterial activity of commercially available dental gel formulations against Streptococcus mutans.

Tüzüner T, Ulusoy AT, Baygin O, Yahyaoglu G, Yalcin I, Buruk K, Nicholson J.Med Princ Pract. 2013;22(4):397-401. doi: 10.1159/000347234. Epub 2013 Mar 7.PMID: 23485568 Free PMC article.


KMEL References