Choice of cement for single-unit crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network

Abstract

BackgroundIn this article, the authors present clinical factors associated with the type of cement practitioners use for restoration of single-unit crowns. MethodsA total of 202 dentists in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network recorded clinical details (including cement type) used for 3,468 single-unit crowns. The authors classified crowns as bonded if the dentist used a resin cement. The authors used mixed-model logistic regression to assess the associations between various clinical factors and the dentist’s decision to bond. ResultsA total of 38.1% of crowns were bonded, and 61.9% were nonbonded; 39.1% (79 of 202) of dentists never bonded a crown, and 20.3% (41 of 202) of dentists bonded every crown in the study. Crowns with excessive occlusal reduction (as judged by laboratory technicians) were more likely to be bonded (P = .02); however, there was no association with bonding and excessive taper (P = .15) or axial reduction (P = .08). Crowns were more likely to be bonded if they were fabricated from leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (76.5%) or lithium disilicate (70.8%) than if they were fabricated from layered zirconia (38.8%), full-contour zirconia (30.1%), full metal (14.7%), or porcelain-fused-to-metal (13.8%) (P < .01) restorative material. There was no significant association between choice to bond and crown margin location (P = .35). Crowns in the anterior maxilla were more likely to be bonded (P < .01). ConclusionsExcessive occlusal tooth preparation, anterior location of a crown, and the use of glass ceramic crowns were associated significantly with the decision to bond. Practical ImplicationsIn this study, the authors identified factors significantly associated with the clinical decision made by practicing dentists when selecting a cement for restoration of single-unit crowns.