Background: To assess the quantity of dentin exposure detected by 3 operators with different clinical expertise for 2 designs of tooth preparation for laminate veneers: window (WI) and butt joint (BJ). Methods: 20 intact maxillary central incisors were collected and then prepared for laminate veneers to a depth of 0.6 mm, with a cervical mini-chamfer finish line of 0.3 mm. Each prepared tooth was analyzed by 3 operators with different expertise: undergraduate student (ST), general practitioner (GP), and prosthodontist (PR), at sight under magnification. Besides descriptive statistics (CI 95%), 2-way ANOVA and Games–Howell tests were used to analyze differences among groups (α = 0.05). Results: The means of percentage and area of detected dentin exposure were WI = 30.48%, 21.57 mm2; BJ = 30.99%, 21.97 mm2; ST/WI = 22.82%, 16.44 mm2; GP/WI = 58.05%, 40.64 mm2; PR/WI = 10.55%, 7.63 mm2; ST/BJ = 28.99%, 20.83 mm2; GP/BJ = 40.56%, 28.32 mm2; PR/BJ = 23.42%, 16.75 mm2. Significant differences were found between ST/WI vs. GP/WI (p = 0.005) and GP/WI vs. PR/WI (p < 0.001). Conclusions: There was no difference in detection of exposed dentin among operators with different expertise for BJ preparation, whereas differences were found between the general practitioner and the other 2 operators in WI. Moreover, the quantity of exposed dentin was not related to different tooth preparation designs.
Dentin Exposure after Tooth Preparation for Laminate Veneers: A Microscopical Analysis to Evaluate the Influence of Operators’ Expertise / Sorrentino, R.; Ruggiero, G.; Borelli, B.; Barlattani, A.; Zarone, F.. - In: MATERIALS. - ISSN 1996-1944. - 15:5(2022). [10.3390/ma15051763]
Dentin Exposure after Tooth Preparation for Laminate Veneers: A Microscopical Analysis to Evaluate the Influence of Operators’ Expertise
Sorrentino R.;Ruggiero G.;Borelli B.;Zarone F.
2022
Abstract
Background: To assess the quantity of dentin exposure detected by 3 operators with different clinical expertise for 2 designs of tooth preparation for laminate veneers: window (WI) and butt joint (BJ). Methods: 20 intact maxillary central incisors were collected and then prepared for laminate veneers to a depth of 0.6 mm, with a cervical mini-chamfer finish line of 0.3 mm. Each prepared tooth was analyzed by 3 operators with different expertise: undergraduate student (ST), general practitioner (GP), and prosthodontist (PR), at sight under magnification. Besides descriptive statistics (CI 95%), 2-way ANOVA and Games–Howell tests were used to analyze differences among groups (α = 0.05). Results: The means of percentage and area of detected dentin exposure were WI = 30.48%, 21.57 mm2; BJ = 30.99%, 21.97 mm2; ST/WI = 22.82%, 16.44 mm2; GP/WI = 58.05%, 40.64 mm2; PR/WI = 10.55%, 7.63 mm2; ST/BJ = 28.99%, 20.83 mm2; GP/BJ = 40.56%, 28.32 mm2; PR/BJ = 23.42%, 16.75 mm2. Significant differences were found between ST/WI vs. GP/WI (p = 0.005) and GP/WI vs. PR/WI (p < 0.001). Conclusions: There was no difference in detection of exposed dentin among operators with different expertise for BJ preparation, whereas differences were found between the general practitioner and the other 2 operators in WI. Moreover, the quantity of exposed dentin was not related to different tooth preparation designs.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Materials 2022 - dentine exposure.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Dominio pubblico
Dimensione
1.64 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.64 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.