North American dental schools were surveyed to determine the types of clinical experiences and the extent of material use that predoctoral students encounter with restorative procedures that employ all-ceramic materials. The results were based on an overall response rate of 80% from the 64 surveyed schools. The majority (96%) of the 51 schools responding to the survey did offer an opportunity to become experienced with all-ceramic restorations. The selection of bases and liners for all-ceramic restorations included dentin adhesive agents, glass ionomer materials, and calcium hydroxide products, by a ratio of 5:4:1, respectively. The most commonly used impression material types were addition silicone and polyether. One or both of these materials were used by every school. Dicor glass ceramic and alumina core ceramic were the most commonly used materials by the responding schools for veneers, onlays, and crowns. Dicor glass ceramic and CAD/CAM ceramic were most commonly used for inlays. Crowns were made of more different all-ceramic material types than the other restoration classes. Fabrication of all-ceramic restorations was primarily by commercial laboratories and school technicians. Students have hands-on experience in the fabrication of all-ceramic restorations in 6% of the responding schools. Luting agents for all-ceramic restorations include dual-cured resin, in 96% of the responding schools, light-cured resin, 43%, and glass ionomer cement, 33%. Zinc phosphate, chemical-cured composite, and polycarboxylate were used by less than one fourth of the respondents. Only resin-based composite materials were used to lute ceramic veneers. Rubber dam was applied primarily during luting procedures involving all-ceramic inlays and onlays. Crowns and veneers were isolated by this method in less than 30% of the responding schools. Finishing procedures with all-ceramic restorations were accomplished with three or more instruments by 89% of the schools.
[1]
Swift Ej.
An update on glass ionomer cements.
,
1988
.
[2]
H. Baharav,et al.
The effect of porcelain color on the hardness of luting composite resin cement.
,
1993,
The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.
[3]
T J Hilton,et al.
Cavity sealers, liners, and bases: current philosophies and indications for use.
,
1996,
Operative dentistry.
[4]
M. Torii,et al.
Marginal adaptability and fit of ceramic milled inlays.
,
1995,
Journal of the American Dental Association.
[5]
N. Nakabayashi,et al.
Effect of HEMA on bonding to dentin.
,
1992,
Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.
[6]
T. Derouen,et al.
Evaluation and control of post-cementation pulpal sensitivity: zinc phosphate and glass ionomer luting cements.
,
1993,
Journal of the American Dental Association.
[7]
I. Mjör,et al.
The teaching of all-ceramic restorations in North American dental schools: curricular requirements and indications.
,
1996,
Journal of esthetic dentistry.
[8]
Horn Hr,et al.
Porcelain laminate veneers bonded to etched enamel.
,
1983
.
[9]
R. Banks.
Conservative posterior ceramic restorations: a literature review.
,
1990,
The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.
[10]
G. Christensen.
A look at state-of-the-art tooth-colored inlays and onlays.
,
1992,
Journal of the American Dental Association.
[11]
J. Richardson,et al.
Polished versus autoglazed dental porcelain.
,
1990,
The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.