Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review
  • Published:

Literature Review

Measurement of restoration longevity: from Robinson's rules to a 13 million restoration dataset – part 2: onwards and upwards

British Dental Journal volume 239, pages 535–539 (2025)Cite this article

Abstract

Aim To present the progression of work on the measurement of restoration survival in teeth from the development of large datasets for this purpose, onwards.

Methods The literature on restoration survival from the early 2000s has been reviewed, including the use of large administrative datasets and datasets developed for research, using examples drawn from the available literature.

Conclusions The need to collect data on restoration survival, and the factors associated with it, was established as long ago as the 1960s. The ability to analyse larger volumes of data facilitated by computer technology has allowed not only the analysis of the survival of the restoration itself, but the corresponding analysis of survival of the restored tooth. Furthermore, the use of current computer technology facilitates analysis of a wide range of associated factors, including patient factors such as socioeconomic and caries risk status.

Key points

  • Given the difficulties in keeping a group of patients/restorations, their clinician and researcher for adequate periods of time, various authors realised that large administrative databases could be of value.

  • Useful information on restoration survival can also be obtained when a sufficiently large group of dentists band together to collect data.

  • A difficult decision made daily when dentists examine a patient's dentition is: ‘does a particular restoration require replacement?'.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Data availability

Any data included in the study are available in the cited papers, including SN7024, available from UKDataService.ac.uk.

References

  1. Burke F J T, Lucarotti P S K. Measurement of restoration longevity: from Robinson's rules to a 13 million restoration dataset – part 1: from the early days to the late 1990s. Br Dent J 2025; 239: 458–462.

  2. Burke F J T. Measuring restoration longevity: it's easier now! Dent Update 2022; 49: 783–786.

  3. Elderton R J. Longitudinal study of dental treatment in the General Dental Services in Scotland. Br Dent J 1983; 155: 91–96.

  4. Gilthorpe M S, Mayhew M T, Bulman J S. Multilevel survival analysis of amalgam restorations amongst RAF personnel. Community Dent Health 2002; 19: 3–11.

  5. Bogacki R E, Hunt R J, del Aguila M, Smith W R. Survival analysis of posterior restorations using an insurance claims database. Oper Dent 2002; 27: 488–492.

  6. Palotie U, Eronen A K, Vehkalahti K, Vehkalahti M M. Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Health Service – a 13-year observation. J Dent 2017; 62: 13–17.

  7. Lucarotti P S K, Holder R L, Burke F J T. Analysis of an administrative database of half a million restorations over 11 years. J Dent 2005; 33: 791–803.

  8. 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.

  9. UK Data Service. Longitudinal Dental Treatment, 1990–2006. Available at https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/doi/?id=7024#!#1 (accessed 1 September 2025).

  10. Burke F J T, Lucarotti P S K. The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 10: key findings from a ten million restoration dataset. Br Dent J 2018; 225: 1011–1018.

  11. Laske M, Opdam N J, Bronkhorst E M, Braspenning J C, Huysmans M C. Longevity of Class II restorations placed in Dutch general dental practices. Descriptive study out of a practice based research network. J Dent 2016; 46: 12–17.

  12. Laske M, Opdam N J, Bronkhorst E M, Braspenning J C, Huysmans M C. Risk factors for dental restoration survival: a practice-based study. J Dent Res 2019; 98: 414–422.

  13. Laske M, Opdam N J, Bronkhorst E M, Braspenning J C, Huysmans M C. Ten-year survival of Class II restorations placed by general dental practitioners. JDR Clin Transl Res 2016; 1: 292–299.

  14. Pallesen U, van Dijken J W. A randomised controlled 30 years follow up of three conventional resin composites in Class II restorations. Dent Mater 2015; 311: 1232–1244.

  15. Da Fonseca Cumerlato C B, Demarco F F, Barros A J et al. Reasons for direct restoration failure from childhood to adolescence: a birth cohort study. J Dent 2019; 89: 103183.

  16. Van de Sande F H, Collares K, Correa M B, Canci M S, Demarco F F, Opdam N J. Restoration survival: revisiting patients' risk factors through a systematic literature review. Oper Dent 2016; DOI: 10.2341/15-120-LIT.

  17. Demarco F F, Corrêa M B, Cenci M S, Moraes R R, Opdam N J M. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater 2012; 28: 87–101.

  18. Demarco F F, Cenci M S, Montagner A F et al. Longevity of composite restorations is definitely not only about materials. Dent Mater 2023; 39: 1–12.

  19. Schwendicke F, Tu Y-K, Blunck U, Paris S, Göstemeyer G. Effect of industry sponsorship on dental restorative trials. J Dent Res 2016; 95: 9–16.

  20. Robinson A D. The life of a filling. Br Dent J 1971; 130: 206–208.

  21. Hickel R, Mesinger S, Opdam N et al. Revised FDI criteria for evaluating direct and indirect dental restorations – recommendations for its clinical use, interpretation, and reporting. Clin Oral Investig 2023; 27: 2573–2592.

  22. Allan D N. The durability of conservative restorations. Br Dent J 1969; 126: 172–177.

  23. Opdam N J, Collares K, Hickel R et al. Clinical studies in restorative dentistry: new directions and new demands. Dent Mater 2018; 34: 1–12.

Download references

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

  1. Honorary Senior Research Fellow, University of Birmingham School of Dentistry, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, B5 7EG, United Kingdom

    P. Steve K. Lucarotti

  2. Emeritus Professor and Specialist in Restorative Dentistry, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom

    F. J. Trevor Burke

Authors
  1. P. Steve K. Lucarotti
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. J. Trevor Burke
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

FJTB and PSKL conceived and designed the work that led to the submission, interpreted the results from the contributing papers, drafted the manuscript and approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. J. Trevor Burke.

Ethics declarations

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lucarotti, P., Burke, F. Measurement of restoration longevity: from Robinson's rules to a 13 million restoration dataset – part 2: onwards and upwards. Br Dent J 239, 535–539 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-025-8506-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-025-8506-9

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links