• Users Online: 113
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 81-84

A survey among dentists in India to identify their favored materials for the fabrication of tooth-supported single crowns depending on the location of the abutment teeth and the preparation margin


1 Department of Prosthodontics Crown and Bridge, Subbaiah Institute of Dental Sciences, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India
2 Department of Conservative and Endodontics, Subbaiah Institute of Dental Sciences, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Arun Kumar Talkal
House. no F- 6, Staff Quarters, B BLOCK, Subbaiah Institute of Dental Sciences, Holehonnur Road, Shivamogga, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/INJO.INJO_27_22

Rights and Permissions

Background: There is a growing and more diverse selection of dental materials on the market, which presents a challenge for dentists who specialize in restorative and prosthetic treatment. Objectives: This survey investigated dentists’ preferences for materials used in the fabrication of tooth-supported single crowns (SCs), taking into account the location of the abutment teeth and the width of the preparation margin. Materials and Methods: The survey aimed to learn more than just basic information about dentists and their practices; it also inquired about the dentists’ go-to materials for making crowns and bridges on abutment teeth, and whether or not those teeth were prepared supra- or subgingivally. Results: A total of 500 dental experts from Karnataka were included in the overview. Dental professionals who did not practice in Karnataka or who delivered less than one fixed dental prosthesis per month were not included in the evaluation. Regardless of the projection tooth and planning edge area, dental practitioners favored heated materials. In terms of materials for SCs without projection tooth areas and supragingival arrangement edges, clay was preferred by the majority of participating dental professionals (75%), followed by porcelain fused to metal (PFMs) (20%) and metal (5%). For each of the four projection teeth, dental specialists most frequently chose lithium-X-silicate ceramics (60%) followed by layered zirconia in the front region and solid zirconia for the molars. 85% of dental specialists who expressed interest in materials for SCs with subgingival planning edges favored pottery, whereas 15% preferred PFM. Conclusion: The clinical situation guides the selection of SC restorative materials by Indian dentists. Several dentists mentioned ceramic materials as their preferred materials for tooth-supported SCs.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed192    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded26    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal