Performance of tunnel restorations at 3-6 years

Journal of Dentistry

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2000, Pages 383-387

  Nicolaisen, S ^a   Von Der Fehr, F R ^b   Lunder, N ^c   Thomsen, I ^b  

^a Buskerud Pub Dental Health Service   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^c Oppland Public Dental Health Service   (Norway)

Author keywords

Approximal restorations; Follow up study; Glass ionomer restorations; Tunnel restorations

Indexed keywords

GLASS IONOMER;

ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; DENTAL CARIES; DENTAL SURGERY; DENTIN; ENAMEL; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; NORWAY; RADIOGRAPHY; SURVIVAL; TOOTH; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

COHORT STUDIES; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DENTAL CARIES; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL ENAMEL; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DENTIN; DMF INDEX; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; NORWAY; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TOOTH; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0034244237     PISSN: 03005712     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00024-5     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Hunt PR. A modified class II cavity preparation for glass-ionomer restorative materials. Quintessence International 1984;10:1011-8.
2. Knight G. The tunnel restoration. Dental Outlook 1984;10:53-7.
3. Helsedirektoratet. Arsmelding 1984-1992. Tannhelsetjenesten i Norge, Helsedirektoratet, Oslo. 1986-1994.
4. Lunder N. Tunnelrestaureringer etter fire ar. Den norske tannlegeforenings tidende 1997;107:508-11.
5. Möller IJ, Poulsen S. A standardized system for diagnosing, recording and analyzing dental caries data. Scandinavian Journal of Dental Research 1973;81:1-11.
6. Lunder N, von der Fehr FR. Approximal cavitation related to bitewing image and caries activity in adolescents. Caries Research 1996;30:143-7.
7. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT user's guide. Version 6. Cary, NC. 4th ed., vol. 2. 1989
8. Svanberg M. Class II amalgam restorations, glass-ionomer tunnel restorations, and caries development on adjacent tooth surfaces: a 3-year clinical study. Caries Research 1992;26:315-8.
9. Hasselrot L. Tunnel restorations. Swedish Dental Journal 1993;17:173-82.
10. Wilkie R, Lidums A, Smales R. Class II glass ionomer cermet tunnel, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations over 2 years. American Journal of Dentistry 1993;6:181-3.
11. Lumley P, Fisher F. Tunnel restorations: a long-term pilot study over a minimum of five years. Journal of Dental Research 1995;23:213-5.
12. Mejàre I, Källestål C, Stenlund H. Incidence and progression of approximal caries from 11 to 22 years of age in Sweden: a prospective radiographic study. Caries Research 1999;33:93-100.
13. Strand GV, Nordbø H, Tveit AB, et al. A 3-year clinical study of tunnel restorations. European Journal of Oral Sciences 1996;104:384-9.
14. Blossfeld HP, Rohwer G. New approaches to causal analysis. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1995. 294 p.
15. Mjor IA. The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 1997;55:58-63.
16. Nordbo H, Leirskar J, von der Fehr FR. Saucer-shaped cavity preparations for posterior approximal resin composite restorations: observations up to 10 years. Quintessence International 1998;29:5-11.
17. Backer-Dirks O. Posteruptive changes in dental enamel. Journal of Dental Research 1966;45:503-11 (supplement to no. 3).
18. Berkey CS, Douglass CW, Valachovic RW, et al. Longitudinal radiographic analysis of carious lesion progression. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 1988;16:83-90.
19. Bille J, Carstens K. Approximal caries progression in 13- to 15-year-old Danish children. Acta odontologica Scandinavica 1989;47:347-54.