The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 140, No 2, 200-209.
© 2009 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Simecek, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, M. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Simecek, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, M. E.
Related Collections
Right arrow Restoratives

RESEARCH

JADA Continuing Education

An Evaluation of Replacement Rates for Posterior Resin-Based Composite and Amalgam Restorations in U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Recruits



John W. Simecek, DDS, MPH, Kim E. Diefenderfer, DMD, MS, MS and Mark E. Cohen, PhD

Background. Restoration replacement is a clinical concern that has not been studied among military personnel. The authors determined the prevalence of placement of posterior amalgam and resin-based composite restorations and the incidence of replacement among U.S. Navy and Marine Corps personnel.

Methods. The authors analyzed dental records from 2,780 personnel to determine the relative risk of replacement for initially sound restorations during subjects’ first years of military service.

Results. At the initial examination, 964 (15.2 percent) of amalgam restorations and 199 (17.4 percent) of resin-based composite restorations required re-treatment. Of those judged clinically acceptable, 14.2 percent of amalgam and 16.7 percent of resin-based composite restorations required replacement during the observation period. The authors found significant increases in replacement rates for resin-based composite restorations compared with amalgam restorations for replacement due to all causes (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.28; P < .05), as well as for replacement due to restoration failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.64; P < .01).

Conclusions. About 30 percent of posterior restorations required replacement, either at the initial examination or during the subjects’ first years of military service. In a young military population, significantly more resin-based composite restorations in place at the initial examination will require replacement than will amalgam restorations. Multi-surface restorations had higher rates of replacement than did one-surface restorations, and subjects at high caries risk experienced significantly higher replacement rates than did those at low caries risk.

Clinical Implications. The number of surfaces restored and subjects’ caries risk status may influence the longevity of resin-based composite and amalgam restorations.

Key Words: Amalgam; resin-based composite; posterior restorations

Abbreviations: DO: Disto-occlusal. DTFs: Dental treatment facilities. • MO: Mesio-occlusal. • MOD: Mesio-occlusodistal. • NIDBR: Naval Institute for Dental and Biomedical Research. • ODRM: Oral Disease Risk Management. • RERs: Replacement of existing restorations. • SOAP: Subjective findings, objective findings, assessment, plan.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-2009 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.