Key Points
-
Overall, over 3.5 million restorations involving premolar teeth were included in the analysis. With regard to time to re-intervention, 42% of restorations had survived at 15 years, and with regard to time to extraction of the restored tooth, cumulative survival was 82%. Factors influencing survival include age of patient, patient's treatment need, and age of dentist.
-
Overall, crowns placed on premolar teeth perform best to re-intervention after 15 years, but worst when the time to extraction of the restored tooth is examined. However, crowns represent a better option in terms of years to extraction of the restored tooth in the over 60 year age group.
-
With regard to tooth position, restored premolar teeth in the upper arch have less good survival time to extraction than those in the lower arch, whereas time to re-intervention on the restoration is similar in both arches.
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Lucarotti P S K, Burke F J T . The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 1: methodology. Br Dent J 2018; 224: 709–716.
Information Centre for Health and Social Care, NHS Business Services Authority. Longitudinal Dental Treatment, 1990–2006. [data collection]. UK Data Service, 2012.
Lucarotti P S K, Burke F J T . The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 6: molar teeth: restoration time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 2018; 225: 525–536
Laske M, Opdam N J M, Bronkhorst J M, Braspenning J C C, Huysmanns M C D N J M . Longevity of restorations in Dutch dental practices. Descriptive study out of a practice-based research network. J.Dent 2016; 46: 12–17.
Burke F J T, Crisp R J, James A et al. Five year clinical evaluation of restorations placed in a low shrinkage stress composite in UK dental practices. Eur J Prosthodont Rest Dent 2017; 25: 108–114.
Palotie U, Eronen A K, Vehkalahti K, Vehkalahti M M . Longevity of 2-and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth in 25-to 30-year olds attending a Public Dental Service: A 13-year observation. J Dent 2017; 62: 13–17.
Fennis W M, Kuijs R H, Kreulen C M, Roeters F J, Creeugers N H, Burgersdijk R C . A survey of cusp fractures in a population of general dental practices. Int J Prosthodont 2002; 15: 559–563.
Patel D K, Burke F J T . Fractures of posterior teeth: a review and analysis of predisposing factors. Prim Dent Care 1995; 2: 6–10.
Lucarotti P S K, Burke F J T . The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 2: Amalgam restorations – time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 2018; 224: 789–800.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of the Economic and Social Data Service, the Health and Social Care Information Centre and the NHS Business Services Authority for collating and releasing this valuable data resource.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lucarotti, P., Burke, F. The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 7: premolar teeth: time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 225, 633–644 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.816
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.816
This article is cited by
-
Canine guidance on crowned teeth: time for a rethink?
British Dental Journal (2021)
-
The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 10: key findings from a ten million restoration dataset
British Dental Journal (2018)
