Dentist-time expenditure for two different adhesive all-ceramic systems
The purpose of this clinical investigation was to compare a chair-side adhesive all-ceramic system to a laboratory processed adhesive all-ceramic system with respect to quality and time expenditure for the dentist. The same dentist treated 10 patients, who were each to receive two large posterior si...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of dentistry 2006-08, Vol.34 (7), p.450-453 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 453 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 450 |
| container_title | Journal of dentistry |
| container_volume | 34 |
| creator | Wurbs, Matthias Simon, James F. Troeltzsch, Markus Denekas, Thomas Wichmann, Manfred Reich, Sven |
| description | The purpose of this clinical investigation was to compare a chair-side adhesive all-ceramic system to a laboratory processed adhesive all-ceramic system with respect to quality and time expenditure for the dentist.
The same dentist treated 10 patients, who were each to receive two large posterior single tooth restorations of similar location and extent. One restoration was made in the laboratory by using the IPS Empress™ system [LAB], the other one was done chair-side by utilizing the Cerec™ system [CHAIR]. The time expenditure was measured for [LAB] and [CHAIR] and compared by the Wilcoxon signed rank test. The restorations were also evaluated according to the USPHS criteria.
The mean time expenditure for the dentist with low-level assistance was 111:03
min [S.D.
±
24:09
min] for [LAB] and 115:31
min [S.D.
±
15:54
min] for [CHAIR]. Time expenditure with medium level assistance for the operator was 100:53
min [S.D.
±
23:59] for [LAB] and 105:50 [S.D.
±
15:28] for [CHAIR]. Assuming a high level of assistance, the mean time values were 53:11
min [S.D.
±
14:29] for [LAB] and 54:29
min [S.D.
±
09:21] for [CHAIR]. The baseline investigation according to the modified USPHS criteria did not reveal any differences between [CHAIR] and [LAB].
There were no statistical significant differences with respect to time expenditure or quality between [LAB] and [CHAIR] in this study. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.005 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68687678</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A151264735</galeid><els_id>S0300571205001843</els_id><sourcerecordid>A151264735</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-7c9cabb2fd2dc7b24f8c27f5f1219d3f3842f8a981cc500f4e7bab030442f9703</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhkVpabZpf0EgGAq52dWHbdmHHEKSpoVALy30JmRplMrY1kaS0-bfd7a7EBpK0WFg5nlnRvMScsJoxShrP4zVaGHJFae0qWhfYXhBNqyTfclk-_0l2VBBadlIxo_Im5RGSmlNef-aHLFWMCyKDbm5whY-5TL7GQr4tYXF-rxGKFyIRf4ZCuudg4hUoe0PSP4BCj1NpYGoZ2-K9JgyzOkteeX0lODdIR6Tbx-vv15-Km-_3Hy-vLgtTd3wXErTGz0M3FlujRx47TrDpWsc46y3womu5q7TfceMaSh1NchBD7hqjfleUnFMzvZ9tzHcr5Cymn0yME16gbAm1XZtJ1vZIfj-GTiGNS64m8KvC86pkOKJutMTKL-4kKM2u5bqgjWMt7UUDVLVPyh8FvAEYQHnMf-XQOwFJoaUIji1jX7W8RFnq515alR_zFM78xTtFQZUnR5WXocZ7JPm4BYC53sA8MIPHqJKxsNiwPoIJisb_H8H_AaTV6n6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1033220373</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dentist-time expenditure for two different adhesive all-ceramic systems</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Wurbs, Matthias ; Simon, James F. ; Troeltzsch, Markus ; Denekas, Thomas ; Wichmann, Manfred ; Reich, Sven</creator><creatorcontrib>Wurbs, Matthias ; Simon, James F. ; Troeltzsch, Markus ; Denekas, Thomas ; Wichmann, Manfred ; Reich, Sven</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of this clinical investigation was to compare a chair-side adhesive all-ceramic system to a laboratory processed adhesive all-ceramic system with respect to quality and time expenditure for the dentist.
The same dentist treated 10 patients, who were each to receive two large posterior single tooth restorations of similar location and extent. One restoration was made in the laboratory by using the IPS Empress™ system [LAB], the other one was done chair-side by utilizing the Cerec™ system [CHAIR]. The time expenditure was measured for [LAB] and [CHAIR] and compared by the Wilcoxon signed rank test. The restorations were also evaluated according to the USPHS criteria.
The mean time expenditure for the dentist with low-level assistance was 111:03
min [S.D.
±
24:09
min] for [LAB] and 115:31
min [S.D.
±
15:54
min] for [CHAIR]. Time expenditure with medium level assistance for the operator was 100:53
min [S.D.
±
23:59] for [LAB] and 105:50 [S.D.
±
15:28] for [CHAIR]. Assuming a high level of assistance, the mean time values were 53:11
min [S.D.
±
14:29] for [LAB] and 54:29
min [S.D.
±
09:21] for [CHAIR]. The baseline investigation according to the modified USPHS criteria did not reveal any differences between [CHAIR] and [LAB].
There were no statistical significant differences with respect to time expenditure or quality between [LAB] and [CHAIR] in this study.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0300-5712</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-176X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16310303</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>All-ceramic restorations ; Aluminum Silicates - chemistry ; CAD/CAM ; Cementation ; Ceramics - chemistry ; Cerec ; Color ; Comparative analysis ; Computer-Aided Design ; Dental Bonding - methods ; Dental Cavity Preparation - methods ; Dental ceramics ; Dental Impression Technique ; Dental Marginal Adaptation ; Dental Porcelain - chemistry ; Dentistry ; Empress ; Female ; Humans ; Inlays - methods ; Inlays - standards ; Laboratories, Dental ; Male ; Surface Properties ; Time expenditure ; Time Factors ; USPHS criteria</subject><ispartof>Journal of dentistry, 2006-08, Vol.34 (7), p.450-453</ispartof><rights>2005 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2006 The Lancet Publishing Group, a division of Elsevier Science Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-7c9cabb2fd2dc7b24f8c27f5f1219d3f3842f8a981cc500f4e7bab030442f9703</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300571205001843$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16310303$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wurbs, Matthias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simon, James F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Troeltzsch, Markus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Denekas, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wichmann, Manfred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reich, Sven</creatorcontrib><title>Dentist-time expenditure for two different adhesive all-ceramic systems</title><title>Journal of dentistry</title><addtitle>J Dent</addtitle><description>The purpose of this clinical investigation was to compare a chair-side adhesive all-ceramic system to a laboratory processed adhesive all-ceramic system with respect to quality and time expenditure for the dentist.
The same dentist treated 10 patients, who were each to receive two large posterior single tooth restorations of similar location and extent. One restoration was made in the laboratory by using the IPS Empress™ system [LAB], the other one was done chair-side by utilizing the Cerec™ system [CHAIR]. The time expenditure was measured for [LAB] and [CHAIR] and compared by the Wilcoxon signed rank test. The restorations were also evaluated according to the USPHS criteria.
The mean time expenditure for the dentist with low-level assistance was 111:03
min [S.D.
±
24:09
min] for [LAB] and 115:31
min [S.D.
±
15:54
min] for [CHAIR]. Time expenditure with medium level assistance for the operator was 100:53
min [S.D.
±
23:59] for [LAB] and 105:50 [S.D.
±
15:28] for [CHAIR]. Assuming a high level of assistance, the mean time values were 53:11
min [S.D.
±
14:29] for [LAB] and 54:29
min [S.D.
±
09:21] for [CHAIR]. The baseline investigation according to the modified USPHS criteria did not reveal any differences between [CHAIR] and [LAB].
There were no statistical significant differences with respect to time expenditure or quality between [LAB] and [CHAIR] in this study.</description><subject>All-ceramic restorations</subject><subject>Aluminum Silicates - chemistry</subject><subject>CAD/CAM</subject><subject>Cementation</subject><subject>Ceramics - chemistry</subject><subject>Cerec</subject><subject>Color</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Computer-Aided Design</subject><subject>Dental Bonding - methods</subject><subject>Dental Cavity Preparation - methods</subject><subject>Dental ceramics</subject><subject>Dental Impression Technique</subject><subject>Dental Marginal Adaptation</subject><subject>Dental Porcelain - chemistry</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Empress</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Inlays - methods</subject><subject>Inlays - standards</subject><subject>Laboratories, Dental</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Surface Properties</subject><subject>Time expenditure</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>USPHS criteria</subject><issn>0300-5712</issn><issn>1879-176X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhkVpabZpf0EgGAq52dWHbdmHHEKSpoVALy30JmRplMrY1kaS0-bfd7a7EBpK0WFg5nlnRvMScsJoxShrP4zVaGHJFae0qWhfYXhBNqyTfclk-_0l2VBBadlIxo_Im5RGSmlNef-aHLFWMCyKDbm5whY-5TL7GQr4tYXF-rxGKFyIRf4ZCuudg4hUoe0PSP4BCj1NpYGoZ2-K9JgyzOkteeX0lODdIR6Tbx-vv15-Km-_3Hy-vLgtTd3wXErTGz0M3FlujRx47TrDpWsc46y3womu5q7TfceMaSh1NchBD7hqjfleUnFMzvZ9tzHcr5Cymn0yME16gbAm1XZtJ1vZIfj-GTiGNS64m8KvC86pkOKJutMTKL-4kKM2u5bqgjWMt7UUDVLVPyh8FvAEYQHnMf-XQOwFJoaUIji1jX7W8RFnq515alR_zFM78xTtFQZUnR5WXocZ7JPm4BYC53sA8MIPHqJKxsNiwPoIJisb_H8H_AaTV6n6</recordid><startdate>20060801</startdate><enddate>20060801</enddate><creator>Wurbs, Matthias</creator><creator>Simon, James F.</creator><creator>Troeltzsch, Markus</creator><creator>Denekas, Thomas</creator><creator>Wichmann, Manfred</creator><creator>Reich, Sven</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>The Lancet Publishing Group, a division of Elsevier Science Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060801</creationdate><title>Dentist-time expenditure for two different adhesive all-ceramic systems</title><author>Wurbs, Matthias ; Simon, James F. ; Troeltzsch, Markus ; Denekas, Thomas ; Wichmann, Manfred ; Reich, Sven</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c452t-7c9cabb2fd2dc7b24f8c27f5f1219d3f3842f8a981cc500f4e7bab030442f9703</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>All-ceramic restorations</topic><topic>Aluminum Silicates - chemistry</topic><topic>CAD/CAM</topic><topic>Cementation</topic><topic>Ceramics - chemistry</topic><topic>Cerec</topic><topic>Color</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Computer-Aided Design</topic><topic>Dental Bonding - methods</topic><topic>Dental Cavity Preparation - methods</topic><topic>Dental ceramics</topic><topic>Dental Impression Technique</topic><topic>Dental Marginal Adaptation</topic><topic>Dental Porcelain - chemistry</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Empress</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Inlays - methods</topic><topic>Inlays - standards</topic><topic>Laboratories, Dental</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Surface Properties</topic><topic>Time expenditure</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>USPHS criteria</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wurbs, Matthias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simon, James F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Troeltzsch, Markus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Denekas, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wichmann, Manfred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reich, Sven</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of dentistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wurbs, Matthias</au><au>Simon, James F.</au><au>Troeltzsch, Markus</au><au>Denekas, Thomas</au><au>Wichmann, Manfred</au><au>Reich, Sven</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dentist-time expenditure for two different adhesive all-ceramic systems</atitle><jtitle>Journal of dentistry</jtitle><addtitle>J Dent</addtitle><date>2006-08-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>450</spage><epage>453</epage><pages>450-453</pages><issn>0300-5712</issn><eissn>1879-176X</eissn><abstract>The purpose of this clinical investigation was to compare a chair-side adhesive all-ceramic system to a laboratory processed adhesive all-ceramic system with respect to quality and time expenditure for the dentist.
The same dentist treated 10 patients, who were each to receive two large posterior single tooth restorations of similar location and extent. One restoration was made in the laboratory by using the IPS Empress™ system [LAB], the other one was done chair-side by utilizing the Cerec™ system [CHAIR]. The time expenditure was measured for [LAB] and [CHAIR] and compared by the Wilcoxon signed rank test. The restorations were also evaluated according to the USPHS criteria.
The mean time expenditure for the dentist with low-level assistance was 111:03
min [S.D.
±
24:09
min] for [LAB] and 115:31
min [S.D.
±
15:54
min] for [CHAIR]. Time expenditure with medium level assistance for the operator was 100:53
min [S.D.
±
23:59] for [LAB] and 105:50 [S.D.
±
15:28] for [CHAIR]. Assuming a high level of assistance, the mean time values were 53:11
min [S.D.
±
14:29] for [LAB] and 54:29
min [S.D.
±
09:21] for [CHAIR]. The baseline investigation according to the modified USPHS criteria did not reveal any differences between [CHAIR] and [LAB].
There were no statistical significant differences with respect to time expenditure or quality between [LAB] and [CHAIR] in this study.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>16310303</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.005</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0300-5712 |
| ispartof | Journal of dentistry, 2006-08, Vol.34 (7), p.450-453 |
| issn | 0300-5712 1879-176X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68687678 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | All-ceramic restorations Aluminum Silicates - chemistry CAD/CAM Cementation Ceramics - chemistry Cerec Color Comparative analysis Computer-Aided Design Dental Bonding - methods Dental Cavity Preparation - methods Dental ceramics Dental Impression Technique Dental Marginal Adaptation Dental Porcelain - chemistry Dentistry Empress Female Humans Inlays - methods Inlays - standards Laboratories, Dental Male Surface Properties Time expenditure Time Factors USPHS criteria |
| title | Dentist-time expenditure for two different adhesive all-ceramic systems |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T06%3A26%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dentist-time%20expenditure%20for%20two%20different%20adhesive%20all-ceramic%20systems&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20dentistry&rft.au=Wurbs,%20Matthias&rft.date=2006-08-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=450&rft.epage=453&rft.pages=450-453&rft.issn=0300-5712&rft.eissn=1879-176X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.005&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA151264735%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1033220373&rft_id=info:pmid/16310303&rft_galeid=A151264735&rft_els_id=S0300571205001843&rfr_iscdi=true |