Abstract
BackgroundTo develop a synthesis within a Bayesian probability framework of previously established evidence, in order to derive an overall conclusion about the hypothesis (H1): ‘High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements (HVGIC) are inferior to silver amalgam as (load bearing) restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth’.MethodsFollowing Bayesian method, the prior Odds that H1 is true (established from past uncontrolled clinical longitudinal and laboratory trials), the Likelihood Ratio incorporating new evidence (established from recent meta-epidemiological studies and systematic reviews of controlled clinical trials), as well as the posterior hypothesis Odds in view of the new evidence, were calculated.ResultsThe prior Odds that HVGICs are clinically inferior to amalgam as restorative materials in posterior permanent teeth in relation to the hypothesis that this is not so was 1.12 to 1. The Likelihood Ratio based on new evidence in favor the hypothesis was zero and the subsequent posterior Odds 0 to 1. Therefore, based on the new evidence, the Odds that HVGICs are clinically inferior to amalgam as restorative materials in posterior permanent teeth degreased from 1.12 to zero.ConclusionThe current evidence suggests lack of support for the hypothesis that high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements are inferior to silver amalgam as restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth. Should future research to this topic uphold the current findings, a wider range of clinical benefits for both patient and care provider, beyond appropriate restoration longevity for placing HVGIC based restorations may apply.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12903-015-0108-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Highlights
To develop a synthesis within a Bayesian probability framework of previously established evidence, in order to derive an overall conclusion about the hypothesis (H1): ‘High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements (HVGIC) are inferior to silver amalgam as restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth’
Bayesian framework Two hypotheses were generated: (i) H1: HVGICs are clinically inferior to amalgam as restorative materials in posterior permanent teeth; (ii)H2: HVGICs are clinically not inferior to amalgam as restorative materials in posterior permanent teeth
Based on the new evidence [1, 8,9,10], the Odds that HVGICs are clinically inferior to amalgam as restorative materials in posterior permanent teeth degreased from 1.12 to zero (Table 1)
Summary
To develop a synthesis within a Bayesian probability framework of previously established evidence, in order to derive an overall conclusion about the hypothesis (H1): ‘High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements (HVGIC) are inferior to silver amalgam as (load bearing) restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth’. HVGICs appear distinct from other (low) viscosity glassionomers (including Cermets) in their comparative clinical. Glass ionomers, such as HVGICs, are reported to adhere primarily via calcium bonds to the mineral content of teeth [3] and provide an adaptive seal. As HVGIC’s leach fluoride ions into the adjacent tooth tissue, these materials are assumed to be capable of slowing the progression of carious lesions [4]. For these reasons, HVGICs are expected to be ideally suited for the management of dental caries. They may simplify the tooth restorative procedure and enable the dentine-pulp complex to react against the caries process [5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
