Abstract
Statement of problem
Different material options are available for fixed dental prostheses (FDPs), but valid
data on the favored materials of German dentists for 3-unit FDPs are lacking. It is
unclear whether preferences depend on the individual characteristics of the dentists
or their dental practices.
Purpose
The purpose of this survey was to identify the preferred material selection of German
dentists for the fabrication of tooth-supported 3-unit FDPs depending on the location
of the abutment teeth and the individual characteristics of the dentist or the dental
practice.
Material and methods
A survey was developed that included questions on the demographic characteristics
(sex, area of expertise, age group, time since graduation, number of inhabitants,
and the postal code of the dental practice or dental school) of the participating
dentist and their preferred materials for the fabrication of tooth-supported 3-unit
FDPs. Three clinical scenarios (anterior maxillary FDP, posterior maxillary FDP, posterior
mandibular FDP) were presented. The dentists were allowed to select from predefined
options or to give a free answer. For comparisons of characteristic associations,
the number of inhabitants was chosen to represent the characteristics of the dental
practice, and sex and time since graduation were selected to represent the characteristics
of the dentist. Group comparisons were conducted with Chi-square tests (α=.05).
Results
A response of 721 dentists from all parts of Germany was received, and data from 688
dentists were included in the analyses. Ceramic was the most preferred material for
the fabrication of 3-unit FDPs independent of the location of the abutment teeth with
veneered zirconia as the favored option. Metal-ceramic was ranked second. The time
since graduation ≤15 years was associated with a preference of ceramic over metal-ceramic
for the anterior restoration (P<.001).
Conclusions
Most participating dentists selected appropriate restorative materials depending on
the individual clinical setting presented in the survey. For the anterior 3-unit FDP,
time since graduation was associated with the preference for a restorative material.
Some dentists selected lithium-X-silicate ceramics for situations beyond their recommended
indication range.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic DentistryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- What is the Optimum for Alveolar Ridge Preservation?.Dent Clin North Am. 2019; 63: 399-418
- Group 2 ITI Consensus Report: Prosthodontics and implant dentistry.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29: 215-223
- Schwere Kost für leichteres Arbeiten (Hard stuff for easy work).(Available at:) (in German)
- Patient-reported effect in patients receiving implant or tooth-supported fixed prosthesis.J Oral Rehabil. 2020; 47: 229-234
- Oral health-related quality of life after prosthodontic treatment for patients with partial edentulism: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 121: 59-68
- All-ceramic or metal-ceramic tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)? A systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Part II: Multiple-unit FDPs.Dent Mater. 2015; 31: 624-639
- A retrospective clinical evaluation of extensive tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses after 10 years.J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 125: 65-72
- Zirconia-ceramic versus metal-ceramic posterior multiunit tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.J Am Dent Assoc. 2020; 151: 230-238
- Flexural strength, fracture toughness, three-body wear, and Martens parameters of pressable lithium-X-silicate ceramics.Dent Mater. 2020; 36: 420-430
- Clinical survival of chair-side generated monolithic lithium disilicate crowns:10-year results.Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 22: 1763-1769
- Ten-year survival and complication rates of lithium-disilicate (Empress 2) tooth-supported crowns, implant-supported crowns, and fixed dental prostheses.J Dent. 2017; 56: 65-77
- Fifteen-year outcome of three-unit fixed dental prostheses made from monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic.J Dent. 2019; 89: 103178
- Mechanical properties of zirconia reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic.Dent Mater. 2016; 32: 908-914
- Celtra Duo Zirconia – Reinforced Lithium Silicate (ZLS).(Available at:)https://www.celtra-dentsplysirona.com/doc/Download/Celtra_Duo/CD_Lab_BRO_EN_ VFIN_22284_Screen.pdfDate: 2017Date accessed: February 15, 2021
- Celtra Press Zirconia – Reinforced Lithium Silicate (ZLS).(Available at:)https://www.celtra-dentsplysirona.com/doc/Download/Celtra_Press/CELTRA_PRESS_ BRO_ VFIN_EN.pdfDate: 2019Date accessed: February 15, 2021
- Straumann n!ce nice to meet you.(Available at:)https://www.straumann.com/content/dam/media-center/straumann/en/documents/brochure/product-information/490.396-en_low.pdfDate: 2020Date accessed: February 15, 2021
- Three generations of zirconia: From veneered to monolithic. Part I.Quintessence Int. 2017; 48: 369-380
- Three generations of zirconia: From veneered to monolithic. Part II.Quintessence Int. 2017; 48: 441-450
- Outcome of bonded vs all-ceramic and metal- ceramic fixed prostheses for single tooth replacement.Eur J Oral Implantol. 2016; 9: S25-S44
- Three-year clinical performance of monolithic and partially veneered zirconia ceramic fixed partial dentures.J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020;
- LuxaCam Composite - Ronde/Block Instructions for use.(Available at:)https://www.dmg-dental.com/fileadmin/user_upload/International/Instructions_for_use/GI_LuxaCamRondeBlock_092010_int.pdfDate: 2016Date accessed: February 15, 2021
- Dentist material selection for single-unit crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.J Dent. 2016; 55: 40-47
- Material selection for tooth-supported single crowns-a survey among dentists in Germany.Clin Oral Investig. 2021; 25: 283-293
- Cementation of Tooth-colored Restorations - A Survey among Dentists in Germany.J Adhes Dent. 2020; 22: 567-571
- Daten & Fakten (Data & Facts).(Available at:)https://www.bzaek.de/fileadmin/PDFs/df21/Daten_Fakten_2021.pdf(in German)Date: 2021Date accessed: February 15, 2021
Article info
Publication history
Published online: April 10, 2021
Footnotes
Supported by a grant from the German Society for Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science/Deutsche Gesellschaft für Prothetische Zahnmedizin und Biomaterialien (DGPro) [Versorgungskompass Festsitzender Zahngetragener Zahnersatz].
Identification
Copyright
© 2021 by the Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
