The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Gregg H. Gilbert - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
impression techniques used for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Michael S Mccracken, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Helena M Minye, Thomas W Oates, Don G Marshall, Cyril Meyerowitz, Gregg H. GilbertAbstract:Purpose To: (1) determine which impression and gingival displacement techniques practitioners use for single-unit crowns on natural teeth; and (2) test whether certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with the use of these techniques. Materials and Methods Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible for this survey study. The study used a questionnaire developed by clinicians, statisticians, laboratory technicians, and survey experts. The questionnaire was pretested via cognitive interviewing with a regionally diverse group of practitioners. The survey included questions regarding gingival displacement and impression techniques. Survey responses were compared by Dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. Results The response rate was 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists (83%). Regarding gingival displacement, most clinicians reported using either a single cord (35%) or dual cord (35%) technique. About 16% of respondents preferred an injectable retraction technique. For making impressions, the most frequently used techniques and materials are: poly(vinyl siloxane), 77%; polyether, 12%; optical/digital, 9%. A dental auxiliary or assistant made the final impression 2% of the time. Regarding dual-arch impression trays, 23% of practitioners report they typically use a metal frame tray, 60% use a plastic frame, and 16% do not use a dual-arch tray. Clinicians using optical impression techniques were more likely to be private practice owners or associates. Conclusions This study documents current techniques for gingival displacement and making impressions for crowns. Certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques.
-
evidence practice gap for dental sealant application results from a dental practice based research network in japan
International Dental Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Yoko Yokoyama, Naoki Kakudate, Futoshi Sumida, Gregg H. Gilbert, Yuki Matsumoto, Valeria V. GordanAbstract:Purpose The study aims were: (i) to examine Dentist practice patterns regarding treatment recommendations for dental sealants; and (ii) to identify characteristics associated with this recommendation. Methods The study was performed using a cross-sectional questionnaire survey (Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT01680848). Participants were Japanese Dentists (n = 282) recruited from the Dental Practice-based Research Network Japan. Three clinical photographs of the occlusal surface of a mandibular first molar were presented, portraying increasing depths of cavitation in a 12-year-old patient with high caries risk. Sealants would be an appropriate treatment in all three scenarios. We asked about the treatment decision for each case. We then performed multiple logistic regression analyses to evaluate associations between the decision to recommend sealants, and Dentist, patient and practice characteristics. Results Responses were obtained from 189 Dentists (response rate = 67%). In the hypothetical scenarios, Dentists’ recommendations for sealants for the 12-year-old patient varied from 16% to 26% across the three hypothetical clinical scenarios. Multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that Dentist agreement with the efficacy of assessment for caries risk showed a significant association with the percentages of patients receiving sealants. Conclusions Dentist practice patterns for sealant treatment recommendation show changes that are dependent on caries severity. The Dentists’ recommendations for sealants for the 12-year-old patient were low for all three selected scenarios, based on indications for sealants in the American Dental Association guidelines. Recommending a sealant showed a significant relationship with the Dentist having a higher agreement with efficacy of caries risk assessment.
-
Dentist material selection for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Dentistry, 2016Co-Authors: Sonia K Makhija, Gregg H. Gilbert, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Cyril Meyerowitz, Nathaniel C Lawson, Jocelyn Mcclelland, Daniel J Pihlstrom, Rahma MungiaAbstract:Abstract Objectives Dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed a study questionnaire about techniques and materials used for single-unit crowns and an enrollment questionnaire about Dentist/practice characteristics. The objectives were to quantify Dentists’ material recommendations and test the hypothesis that Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics are significantly associated with these recommendations. Methods Surveyed Dentists responded to a contextual scenario asking what material they would use for a single-unit crown on an anterior and posterior tooth. Material choices included: full metal, porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM), all-zirconia, layered zirconia, lithium disilicate, leucite-reinforced ceramic, or other. Results 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists responded (83%). The top 3 choices for anterior crowns were lithium disilicate (54%), layered zirconia (17%), and leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (13%). There were significant differences (p Conclusions Network Dentists use a broad range of materials for single-unit crowns for anterior and posterior teeth, adopting newer materials into their practices as they become available. Material choices are significantly associated with Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics. Clinical significance Decisions for crown material may be influenced by factors unrelated to tooth and patient variables. Dentists should be cognizant of this when developing an evidence-based approach to selecting crown material.
-
evidence practice gap for in office fluoride application in a dental practice based research network
Journal of Public Health Dentistry, 2016Co-Authors: Yoko Yokoyama, Naoki Kakudate, Futoshi Sumida, Gregg H. Gilbert, Yuki Matsumoto, Valeria V. GordanAbstract:Objective The aims of this study were to examine Dentists' recommendations for in-office fluoride to patients and identify Dentists' characteristics associated with these recommendations. Study Design and Setting The study was conducted using a cross-sectional questionnaire survey in Japan. The survey queried Dentists (n = 282) in outpatient dental practices affiliated with the Dental Practice-based Research Network Japan (JDPBRN). This network aims to assist Dentists in investigating research questions and sharing their experience and expertise. Results The responses were obtained by 189 Dentists (67 percent). Among valid response, 54 percent of Dentists (n = 98) recommend in-office fluoride to more than 50 percent of their patients aged 6-18 years and 15 percent (n = 29) recommended this care to more than 50 percent of their patients aged over 18 years. Multiple logistic regression analysis suggested that factors associated with the percentage of patients who are recommended in-office fluoride included patient's interest in caries prevention and Dentist's belief in the effectiveness of caries risk assessment. Conclusions Dentist practice patterns for recommending in-office fluoride vary widely. Recommendation was significantly related to having a higher percentage of patients interested in caries prevention and to the Dentist's belief about the effectiveness of caries risk assessment. (Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT01680848).
-
restorative treatment thresholds for proximal caries in dental pbrn
Journal of Dental Research, 2012Co-Authors: Naoki Kakudate, Futoshi Sumida, Y. Matsumoto, K. Manabe, Yoko Yokoyama, Gregg H. Gilbert, Valeria V. GordanAbstract:This study was conducted to assess caries treatment thresholds among Japanese Dentists and to identify characteristics associated with their decision to intervene surgically in proximal caries lesions within the enamel. Participants (n = 189) were shown radiographic images depicting interproximal caries and asked to indicate the lesion depth at which they would surgically intervene in both high- and low-caries-risk scenarios. Differences in treatment thresholds were then assessed via chi-square tests, and associations between the decision to intervene and Dentist, practice, and patient characteristics were analyzed via logistic regression. The proportion of Dentists who indicated surgical intervention into enamel was significantly higher in the high-caries-risk scenario (73.8%, N = 138) than in the low-caries-risk scenario (46.5%, N = 87) (p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses for a high-caries-risk scenario, gender of Dentist, city population, type of practice, conducting caries-risk assessment, and admin...
Valeria V. Gordan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
impression techniques used for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Michael S Mccracken, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Helena M Minye, Thomas W Oates, Don G Marshall, Cyril Meyerowitz, Gregg H. GilbertAbstract:Purpose To: (1) determine which impression and gingival displacement techniques practitioners use for single-unit crowns on natural teeth; and (2) test whether certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with the use of these techniques. Materials and Methods Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible for this survey study. The study used a questionnaire developed by clinicians, statisticians, laboratory technicians, and survey experts. The questionnaire was pretested via cognitive interviewing with a regionally diverse group of practitioners. The survey included questions regarding gingival displacement and impression techniques. Survey responses were compared by Dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. Results The response rate was 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists (83%). Regarding gingival displacement, most clinicians reported using either a single cord (35%) or dual cord (35%) technique. About 16% of respondents preferred an injectable retraction technique. For making impressions, the most frequently used techniques and materials are: poly(vinyl siloxane), 77%; polyether, 12%; optical/digital, 9%. A dental auxiliary or assistant made the final impression 2% of the time. Regarding dual-arch impression trays, 23% of practitioners report they typically use a metal frame tray, 60% use a plastic frame, and 16% do not use a dual-arch tray. Clinicians using optical impression techniques were more likely to be private practice owners or associates. Conclusions This study documents current techniques for gingival displacement and making impressions for crowns. Certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques.
-
evidence practice gap for dental sealant application results from a dental practice based research network in japan
International Dental Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Yoko Yokoyama, Naoki Kakudate, Futoshi Sumida, Gregg H. Gilbert, Yuki Matsumoto, Valeria V. GordanAbstract:Purpose The study aims were: (i) to examine Dentist practice patterns regarding treatment recommendations for dental sealants; and (ii) to identify characteristics associated with this recommendation. Methods The study was performed using a cross-sectional questionnaire survey (Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT01680848). Participants were Japanese Dentists (n = 282) recruited from the Dental Practice-based Research Network Japan. Three clinical photographs of the occlusal surface of a mandibular first molar were presented, portraying increasing depths of cavitation in a 12-year-old patient with high caries risk. Sealants would be an appropriate treatment in all three scenarios. We asked about the treatment decision for each case. We then performed multiple logistic regression analyses to evaluate associations between the decision to recommend sealants, and Dentist, patient and practice characteristics. Results Responses were obtained from 189 Dentists (response rate = 67%). In the hypothetical scenarios, Dentists’ recommendations for sealants for the 12-year-old patient varied from 16% to 26% across the three hypothetical clinical scenarios. Multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that Dentist agreement with the efficacy of assessment for caries risk showed a significant association with the percentages of patients receiving sealants. Conclusions Dentist practice patterns for sealant treatment recommendation show changes that are dependent on caries severity. The Dentists’ recommendations for sealants for the 12-year-old patient were low for all three selected scenarios, based on indications for sealants in the American Dental Association guidelines. Recommending a sealant showed a significant relationship with the Dentist having a higher agreement with efficacy of caries risk assessment.
-
Dentist material selection for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Dentistry, 2016Co-Authors: Sonia K Makhija, Gregg H. Gilbert, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Cyril Meyerowitz, Nathaniel C Lawson, Jocelyn Mcclelland, Daniel J Pihlstrom, Rahma MungiaAbstract:Abstract Objectives Dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed a study questionnaire about techniques and materials used for single-unit crowns and an enrollment questionnaire about Dentist/practice characteristics. The objectives were to quantify Dentists’ material recommendations and test the hypothesis that Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics are significantly associated with these recommendations. Methods Surveyed Dentists responded to a contextual scenario asking what material they would use for a single-unit crown on an anterior and posterior tooth. Material choices included: full metal, porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM), all-zirconia, layered zirconia, lithium disilicate, leucite-reinforced ceramic, or other. Results 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists responded (83%). The top 3 choices for anterior crowns were lithium disilicate (54%), layered zirconia (17%), and leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (13%). There were significant differences (p Conclusions Network Dentists use a broad range of materials for single-unit crowns for anterior and posterior teeth, adopting newer materials into their practices as they become available. Material choices are significantly associated with Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics. Clinical significance Decisions for crown material may be influenced by factors unrelated to tooth and patient variables. Dentists should be cognizant of this when developing an evidence-based approach to selecting crown material.
-
evidence practice gap for in office fluoride application in a dental practice based research network
Journal of Public Health Dentistry, 2016Co-Authors: Yoko Yokoyama, Naoki Kakudate, Futoshi Sumida, Gregg H. Gilbert, Yuki Matsumoto, Valeria V. GordanAbstract:Objective The aims of this study were to examine Dentists' recommendations for in-office fluoride to patients and identify Dentists' characteristics associated with these recommendations. Study Design and Setting The study was conducted using a cross-sectional questionnaire survey in Japan. The survey queried Dentists (n = 282) in outpatient dental practices affiliated with the Dental Practice-based Research Network Japan (JDPBRN). This network aims to assist Dentists in investigating research questions and sharing their experience and expertise. Results The responses were obtained by 189 Dentists (67 percent). Among valid response, 54 percent of Dentists (n = 98) recommend in-office fluoride to more than 50 percent of their patients aged 6-18 years and 15 percent (n = 29) recommended this care to more than 50 percent of their patients aged over 18 years. Multiple logistic regression analysis suggested that factors associated with the percentage of patients who are recommended in-office fluoride included patient's interest in caries prevention and Dentist's belief in the effectiveness of caries risk assessment. Conclusions Dentist practice patterns for recommending in-office fluoride vary widely. Recommendation was significantly related to having a higher percentage of patients interested in caries prevention and to the Dentist's belief about the effectiveness of caries risk assessment. (Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT01680848).
-
restorative treatment thresholds for proximal caries in dental pbrn
Journal of Dental Research, 2012Co-Authors: Naoki Kakudate, Futoshi Sumida, Y. Matsumoto, K. Manabe, Yoko Yokoyama, Gregg H. Gilbert, Valeria V. GordanAbstract:This study was conducted to assess caries treatment thresholds among Japanese Dentists and to identify characteristics associated with their decision to intervene surgically in proximal caries lesions within the enamel. Participants (n = 189) were shown radiographic images depicting interproximal caries and asked to indicate the lesion depth at which they would surgically intervene in both high- and low-caries-risk scenarios. Differences in treatment thresholds were then assessed via chi-square tests, and associations between the decision to intervene and Dentist, practice, and patient characteristics were analyzed via logistic regression. The proportion of Dentists who indicated surgical intervention into enamel was significantly higher in the high-caries-risk scenario (73.8%, N = 138) than in the low-caries-risk scenario (46.5%, N = 87) (p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses for a high-caries-risk scenario, gender of Dentist, city population, type of practice, conducting caries-risk assessment, and admin...
Mark S Litaker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
impression techniques used for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Michael S Mccracken, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Helena M Minye, Thomas W Oates, Don G Marshall, Cyril Meyerowitz, Gregg H. GilbertAbstract:Purpose To: (1) determine which impression and gingival displacement techniques practitioners use for single-unit crowns on natural teeth; and (2) test whether certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with the use of these techniques. Materials and Methods Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible for this survey study. The study used a questionnaire developed by clinicians, statisticians, laboratory technicians, and survey experts. The questionnaire was pretested via cognitive interviewing with a regionally diverse group of practitioners. The survey included questions regarding gingival displacement and impression techniques. Survey responses were compared by Dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. Results The response rate was 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists (83%). Regarding gingival displacement, most clinicians reported using either a single cord (35%) or dual cord (35%) technique. About 16% of respondents preferred an injectable retraction technique. For making impressions, the most frequently used techniques and materials are: poly(vinyl siloxane), 77%; polyether, 12%; optical/digital, 9%. A dental auxiliary or assistant made the final impression 2% of the time. Regarding dual-arch impression trays, 23% of practitioners report they typically use a metal frame tray, 60% use a plastic frame, and 16% do not use a dual-arch tray. Clinicians using optical impression techniques were more likely to be private practice owners or associates. Conclusions This study documents current techniques for gingival displacement and making impressions for crowns. Certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques.
-
Dentist material selection for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Dentistry, 2016Co-Authors: Sonia K Makhija, Gregg H. Gilbert, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Cyril Meyerowitz, Nathaniel C Lawson, Jocelyn Mcclelland, Daniel J Pihlstrom, Rahma MungiaAbstract:Abstract Objectives Dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed a study questionnaire about techniques and materials used for single-unit crowns and an enrollment questionnaire about Dentist/practice characteristics. The objectives were to quantify Dentists’ material recommendations and test the hypothesis that Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics are significantly associated with these recommendations. Methods Surveyed Dentists responded to a contextual scenario asking what material they would use for a single-unit crown on an anterior and posterior tooth. Material choices included: full metal, porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM), all-zirconia, layered zirconia, lithium disilicate, leucite-reinforced ceramic, or other. Results 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists responded (83%). The top 3 choices for anterior crowns were lithium disilicate (54%), layered zirconia (17%), and leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (13%). There were significant differences (p Conclusions Network Dentists use a broad range of materials for single-unit crowns for anterior and posterior teeth, adopting newer materials into their practices as they become available. Material choices are significantly associated with Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics. Clinical significance Decisions for crown material may be influenced by factors unrelated to tooth and patient variables. Dentists should be cognizant of this when developing an evidence-based approach to selecting crown material.
Cyril Meyerowitz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
impression techniques used for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Michael S Mccracken, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Helena M Minye, Thomas W Oates, Don G Marshall, Cyril Meyerowitz, Gregg H. GilbertAbstract:Purpose To: (1) determine which impression and gingival displacement techniques practitioners use for single-unit crowns on natural teeth; and (2) test whether certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with the use of these techniques. Materials and Methods Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible for this survey study. The study used a questionnaire developed by clinicians, statisticians, laboratory technicians, and survey experts. The questionnaire was pretested via cognitive interviewing with a regionally diverse group of practitioners. The survey included questions regarding gingival displacement and impression techniques. Survey responses were compared by Dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. Results The response rate was 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists (83%). Regarding gingival displacement, most clinicians reported using either a single cord (35%) or dual cord (35%) technique. About 16% of respondents preferred an injectable retraction technique. For making impressions, the most frequently used techniques and materials are: poly(vinyl siloxane), 77%; polyether, 12%; optical/digital, 9%. A dental auxiliary or assistant made the final impression 2% of the time. Regarding dual-arch impression trays, 23% of practitioners report they typically use a metal frame tray, 60% use a plastic frame, and 16% do not use a dual-arch tray. Clinicians using optical impression techniques were more likely to be private practice owners or associates. Conclusions This study documents current techniques for gingival displacement and making impressions for crowns. Certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques.
-
Dentist material selection for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Dentistry, 2016Co-Authors: Sonia K Makhija, Gregg H. Gilbert, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Cyril Meyerowitz, Nathaniel C Lawson, Jocelyn Mcclelland, Daniel J Pihlstrom, Rahma MungiaAbstract:Abstract Objectives Dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed a study questionnaire about techniques and materials used for single-unit crowns and an enrollment questionnaire about Dentist/practice characteristics. The objectives were to quantify Dentists’ material recommendations and test the hypothesis that Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics are significantly associated with these recommendations. Methods Surveyed Dentists responded to a contextual scenario asking what material they would use for a single-unit crown on an anterior and posterior tooth. Material choices included: full metal, porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM), all-zirconia, layered zirconia, lithium disilicate, leucite-reinforced ceramic, or other. Results 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists responded (83%). The top 3 choices for anterior crowns were lithium disilicate (54%), layered zirconia (17%), and leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (13%). There were significant differences (p Conclusions Network Dentists use a broad range of materials for single-unit crowns for anterior and posterior teeth, adopting newer materials into their practices as they become available. Material choices are significantly associated with Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics. Clinical significance Decisions for crown material may be influenced by factors unrelated to tooth and patient variables. Dentists should be cognizant of this when developing an evidence-based approach to selecting crown material.
David R Louis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
impression techniques used for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Michael S Mccracken, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Helena M Minye, Thomas W Oates, Don G Marshall, Cyril Meyerowitz, Gregg H. GilbertAbstract:Purpose To: (1) determine which impression and gingival displacement techniques practitioners use for single-unit crowns on natural teeth; and (2) test whether certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with the use of these techniques. Materials and Methods Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible for this survey study. The study used a questionnaire developed by clinicians, statisticians, laboratory technicians, and survey experts. The questionnaire was pretested via cognitive interviewing with a regionally diverse group of practitioners. The survey included questions regarding gingival displacement and impression techniques. Survey responses were compared by Dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. Results The response rate was 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists (83%). Regarding gingival displacement, most clinicians reported using either a single cord (35%) or dual cord (35%) technique. About 16% of respondents preferred an injectable retraction technique. For making impressions, the most frequently used techniques and materials are: poly(vinyl siloxane), 77%; polyether, 12%; optical/digital, 9%. A dental auxiliary or assistant made the final impression 2% of the time. Regarding dual-arch impression trays, 23% of practitioners report they typically use a metal frame tray, 60% use a plastic frame, and 16% do not use a dual-arch tray. Clinicians using optical impression techniques were more likely to be private practice owners or associates. Conclusions This study documents current techniques for gingival displacement and making impressions for crowns. Certain Dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques.
-
Dentist material selection for single unit crowns findings from the national dental practice based research network
Journal of Dentistry, 2016Co-Authors: Sonia K Makhija, Gregg H. Gilbert, Valeria V. Gordan, David R Louis, Mark S Litaker, Cyril Meyerowitz, Nathaniel C Lawson, Jocelyn Mcclelland, Daniel J Pihlstrom, Rahma MungiaAbstract:Abstract Objectives Dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network completed a study questionnaire about techniques and materials used for single-unit crowns and an enrollment questionnaire about Dentist/practice characteristics. The objectives were to quantify Dentists’ material recommendations and test the hypothesis that Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics are significantly associated with these recommendations. Methods Surveyed Dentists responded to a contextual scenario asking what material they would use for a single-unit crown on an anterior and posterior tooth. Material choices included: full metal, porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM), all-zirconia, layered zirconia, lithium disilicate, leucite-reinforced ceramic, or other. Results 1777 of 2132 eligible Dentists responded (83%). The top 3 choices for anterior crowns were lithium disilicate (54%), layered zirconia (17%), and leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (13%). There were significant differences (p Conclusions Network Dentists use a broad range of materials for single-unit crowns for anterior and posterior teeth, adopting newer materials into their practices as they become available. Material choices are significantly associated with Dentist’s and practice’s characteristics. Clinical significance Decisions for crown material may be influenced by factors unrelated to tooth and patient variables. Dentists should be cognizant of this when developing an evidence-based approach to selecting crown material.