Mackey TK, Contreras JT, Liang BA The Minamata Convention on Mercury: attempting to address the global controversy of dental amalgam use and mercury waste disposal. Sci Total Environ. 2014; 472:125-129 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.10.115
Howe DF, Denehy GE Anterior fixed partial dentures utilizing the acid-etch technique and a cast metal framework. J Prosthet Dent. 1977; 37:28-31 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(77)90187-1
Livaditis GJ, Thompson VP Etched castings: an improved retentive mechanism for resin-bonded retainers. J Prosthet Dent. 1982; 47:52-58 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(82)90242-6
Idris RI, Shoji Y, Lim TW Occlusal force and occlusal contact reestablishment with resin-bonded fixed partial dental prostheses using the Dahl concept: a clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2022; 127:737-743 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.11.035
Djemal S, Setchell D, King P, Wickens J Long-term survival characteristics of 832 resin-retained bridges and splints provided in a post-graduate teaching hospital between 1978 and 1993. J Oral Rehabil. 1999; 26:302-320 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1999.00374.x
King PA, Foster LV, Yates RJ Survival characteristics of 771 resin-retained bridges provided at a UK dental teaching hospital. Br Dent J. 2015; 218:423-428 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.250
St George G, Hemmings K, Patel K Resin-retained bridges re-visited. Part 1. History and indications. Prim Dent Care. 2002; 9:87-91 https://doi.org/10.1308/135576102322492927
St George G, Hemmings K, Patel K Resin-retained bridges re-visited. Part 2. Clinical considerations. Prim Dent Care. 2002; 9:139-144 https://doi.org/10.1308/135576102322482009
Calamia JR Etched porcelain facial veneers: a new treatment modality based on scientific and clinical evidence. N Y J Dent. 1983; 53:255-259
Rosenthal L: Rosetta Books; 2017
Alani A, Kelleher M, Hemmings K Balancing the risks and benefits associated with cosmetic dentistry – a joint statement by UK specialist dental societies. Br Dent J. 2015; 218:543-548 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.345
Layton DM, Walton TR The up to 21-year clinical outcome and survival of feldspathic porcelain veneers: accounting for clustering. Int J Prosthodont. 2012; 25:604-612
Edelhoff D, Sorensen JA Tooth structure removal associated with various preparation designs for anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2002; 87:503-509 https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.124094
Sulaiman TA, Abdulmajeed AA, Delgado A, Donovan TE Fracture rate of 188,695 lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramic restorations after up to 7.5 years of clinical service: a dental laboratory survey. J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 123:807-810 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.011
Gough MB, Setchell DJ A retrospective study of 50 treatments using an appliance to produce localised occlusal space by relative axial tooth movement. Br Dent J. 1999; 187:134-139 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800223
Darbar UR, Hemmings KW Treatment of localized anterior toothwear with composite restorations at an increased occlusal vertical dimension. Dent Update. 1997; 24:72-75
Milosevic A, Burnside G The survival of direct composite restorations in the management of severe tooth wear including attrition and erosion: a prospective 8-year study. J Dent. 2016; 44:13-19 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.10.015
Gulamali AB, Hemmings KW, Tredwin CJ, Petrie A Survival analysis of composite Dahl restorations provided to manage localised anterior tooth wear (ten year follow-up). Br Dent J. 2011; 211 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.683
Witter DJ, van Palenstein Helderman WH The shortened dental arch concept and its implications for oral health care. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1999; 27:249-258 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.1998.tb02018.x
Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A The impact of oral implants – past and future, 1966–2042. J Can Dent Assoc. 2005; 71
Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Montreal, Quebec, May 24–25, 2002. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002; 17:601-602
Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients – the York Consensus Statement. Br Dent J. 2009; 207:185-16 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.728
Pjetursson BE, Helbling C, Weber HP Peri-implantitis susceptibility as it relates to periodontal therapy and supportive care. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23:888-894 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.16000501.2012.02474.x
Albrektsson T, Buser D, Sennerby L On crestal/marginal bone loss around dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012; 27:736-738
Ower P Prognostication in periodontics–science or art?. Dent Update. 2018; 45:496-505
Zitzmann NU, Krastl G, Hecker H Endodontics or implants? A review of decisive criteria and guidelines for single tooth restorations and full arch reconstructions. Int Endod J. 2009; 42:757-774 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652591.2009.01561.x
Ante IH The fundamental principles, design and construction of crown and bridge prosthesis. Dental Item Int. 1928; 50:215-232
Hirschfeld L, Wasserman B A long-term survey of tooth loss in 600 treated periodontal patients. J Periodontol. 1978; 49:225-237 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1978.49.5.225
Nyman S, Lindhe J, Lundgren D The role of occlusion for the stability of fixed bridges in patients with reduced periodontal tissue support. J Clin Periodontol. 1975; 2:53-66 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.1975.tb01726.x
Nuttall NM, Steele JG, Pine CM The impact of oral health on people in the UK in 1998. Br Dent J. 2001; 190:121-126 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800901
White DA, Tsakos G, Pitts NB Adult Dental Health Survey 2009: common oral health conditions and their impact on the population. Br Dent J. 2012; 213:567-572 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.1088
Roberts DH: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1980
Cvar J F, Ryge GSan Francisco: US Government Printing Office; 1970
Belser UC, Grütter L, Vailati F Outcome evaluation of early placed maxillary anterior single-tooth implants using objective esthetic criteria: a crosssectional, retrospective study in 45 patients with a 2- to 4-year follow-up using pink and white esthetic scores. J Periodontol. 2009; 80:140-151 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080435
Takeshita K, Vandeweghe S, Vervack V immediate implant placement and loading of single implants in the esthetic zone: clinical outcome and esthetic evaluation in a Japanese population. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2015; 35:715-723 https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.2494
Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg. 1981; 10:387-416 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0300-9785(81)80077-4
Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990; 5:347-359
Jemt T Single-implant survival: more than 30 years of clinical experience. Int J Prosthodont. 2016; 29:551-558 https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4892
Ingle JI, Beveridge EE, Glick DH, Weichman JA Endodontic success, failure–the Washington Study. Endodontics. 1994; 4:21-45
Lambert PM, Morris HF, Ochi S Positive effect of surgical experience with implants on second-stage implant survival. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997; 55:(12 Suppl 5)12-18 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(16)31192-2
Zoghbi SA, de Lima LA, Saraiva L, Romito GA Surgical experience influences 2-stage implant osseointegration. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69:2771-2776 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2011.03.031
Lewis K The five ‘C’s of lifelong learning: CPD, choices, collegiality, challenges and consequences. Br Dent J. 2023; 234:22-26 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-022-5403-3
Cooper N The emergence of the IGen dentist and the implications for the workforce. Dent Update. 2023; 50:77-81
There have been significant changes in restorative dentistry since the first publication of Dental Update 50 years ago. The changes in prosthodontics are described in this article, as are the interactions with the sister disciplines of endodontics and periodontology. Conventional crowns, bridges and dentures were the main ‘tools of the trade’ in the 1970s. Adhesive materials, dental implants and bleaching have allowed a less destructive way of repairing and replacing teeth. Dentists and patients have different attitudes to dentistry today. Technology continues to improve, and how we practice continues to evolve.
CPD/Clinical Relevance: Looking back over 50 years of clinical dentistry is useful to see the changes in our day-to-day practice and see the techniques which have passed the test of time.
Article
There has been significant change in the practice of restorative dentistry over the last 50 years. I have practised for just a little over 40 of these years and have found current practice to be much easier and with improved outcomes compared to when I started. When new materials or techniques are developed, the hope is that they will be successful. This is judged by many factors including improved biological or financial outcome and survival, a simplified application or better patient acceptance. The evidence to support these perceptions lags significantly behind. Nevertheless, some techniques have good evidence and have been adopted into regular general or specialist practice. This article highlights some of the major changes that have changed how we provide treatment for our patients today. These include adhesive dentistry, bleaching, dental implants and the use of the ‘Dahl’ concept. This article looks at how these developments have changed our treatment planning, rather than giving a historical literature review or in-depth description of technique.
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:
