Dentist-time expenditure for two different adhesive all-ceramic systems

Area of Science:

• Dental Materials Science
• Restorative Dentistry
• Clinical Dentistry

Background:

• All-ceramic restorations are widely used for dental prosthetics.
• Chair-side and laboratory fabrication methods offer different approaches to creating these restorations.
• Evaluating the efficiency and quality of these systems is crucial for clinical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the time expenditure and quality of a chair-side all-ceramic system (Cerec) versus a laboratory-processed all-ceramic system (IPS Empress).
• To assess the clinical performance of both systems for posterior single-tooth restorations.

Main Methods:

• Ten patients received two posterior single-tooth restorations each, one fabricated chair-side (Cerec) and one in the laboratory (IPS Empress).
• Dentist time expenditure was measured and compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.
• Restoration quality was evaluated using modified USPHS criteria.

Main Results:

• Mean time expenditures were comparable across different levels of dental assistant assistance for both systems.
• No statistically significant differences in time expenditure were found between the Cerec and IPS Empress systems.
• The baseline investigation revealed no differences in restoration quality between the chair-side and laboratory-processed systems.

Conclusions:

• Both chair-side (Cerec) and laboratory-processed (IPS Empress) all-ceramic systems demonstrate comparable quality for posterior single-tooth restorations.
• There are no significant differences in the time required for dentists to complete restorations using either the Cerec or IPS Empress system.
• The choice between chair-side and laboratory fabrication may depend on other clinical factors beyond time and quality.