CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 454Dental materials and restorationsEndodontics and Root Canal TreatmentsDental Health and Care Utilization

Reasons for replacement of restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice

Open access
Mjör, Ivar A., Moorhead, Jacquelyn E., Dahl, Jon E.·2000·International Dental Journal
DOI 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2000.tb00569.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objective The analysis of reasons for the replacement of 9,805 amalgam, composite, glass ionomer, resin modified glass ionomer and 'other' restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice.Design The data were subdivided on the bases of age and gender of the patients, the types of restorations and the clinicians' gender, experience and practice setting.Results The clinical diagnosis of secondary caries was the main reason for replacement of all types of restorations studied, followed by fracture of restorations, especially bulk fracture, irrespective of patient's age. Bulk discoloration was the third most common reason for replacement of resin based materials in adults, but it rarely occurred in adolescents 18 years and younger. The reasons for replacement of restorations were not associated with the gender of the patients. Subgroupings based on the clinicians' gender showed that female clinicians diagnosed secondary caries more often than male clinicians. Otherwise, the reasons for replacements were similar for both genders of clinicians. Subdivision of restorations based on the years since graduation of the clinicians resulted in small groups. The youngest group of clinicians diagnosed relatively more secondary caries both for amalgam and composite restorations than the most experienced group.Conclusion The clinical diagnosis secondary caries was the main reason for replacement of all types of restorations studied.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2000.tb00569.x

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Replacement of defective restorations is one of the most frequent problems encountered by general practitioners and accounts for over 50% of work in general dental practice.

    “Replacement of defective restorations is one of the most frequent problems encountered by general practitioners today and accounts for over 50% of the work performed in general dental practice [11-13].”

    From Translating research into everyday clinical practice: Lessons learned from a USA dental practice-based research network (2013) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Materials and methods section (page unavailable) reports that 49% of restorations placed in permanent teeth by surveyed Norwegian general dentists were replacements, supporting that replacement is common. It does not establish that replacement accounts for over 50% of all work in general dental practice; the percentage is below 50% and has a narrower denominator. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Clinical diagnosis of secondary caries is ill-defined and marginal staining is often mistakenly diagnosed as caries lesions.

    “The clinical diagnosis of secondary caries is ill-defined [51-56] and marginal staining is often mistakenly diagnosed by clinicians as caries lesions [11,12,57,58].”

    From Translating research into everyday clinical practice: Lessons learned from a USA dental practice-based research network (2013) · cites this paper as [12]

    The citation group attached to this source concerns the claim that clinicians often mistake marginal staining for caries. The Materials and methods section distinguishes marginal discolouration from secondary caries, and the Results report their recorded frequencies, but neither establishes that staining was often misdiagnosed. The Discussion says secondary-caries diagnosis is ill-defined, but that is the separately cited first clause. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [26]26. extracted teeth with Class I1 amalgam restorations. A stereo and polarized light microscopic study. Ph.D. thesis. University of Copenhagen, 1997.
  2. [56]56. Mjor I A. Direct posterior filling materials. In: Vanherle G, Degrange M, Willems G, (eds.) State of the art on direct posterior jlling materials and dentin bonding. pp 1-13; Leuven: van der Poorten 1993.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mjör, I. A., Moorhead, J. E., & Dahl, J. E.
Affiliations
University of Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Mjör, Ivar A.
ORCID
Dahl, Jon E.
Venue
International Dental Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-12
Volume
50
Issue
6
Pages
361-366
ISSN
0020-6539 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/j.1875-595x.2000.tb00569.x
OpenAlex
W1998444495
Cited by
454
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 35
FWCI
8.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Dental Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p50de009307-10, DE09307)
  • National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (2P50 DE 09307-09)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Dental materials and restorations
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Dental Health and Care Utilization
Keywords
restoration replacement, secondary caries, permanent teeth, amalgam restorations, composite resin restorations, glass ionomer restorations, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, bulk fracture, discoloration, clinician experience, general dental practice
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Composite Resins, Dental Amalgam, Dental Caries, Dental Restoration, Permanent, Female, General Practice, Dental, Glass Ionomer Cements, Humans, Male, Sex Factors, Tooth Discoloration, Tooth Fractures, Chi-Square Distribution, Dentition, Permanent, Retreatment, Practice Patterns, Dentists'

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review