{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027912386121341344, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01337468501647606, 'mean_word_length': 5.458072590738423, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effect of adhesive systems and bevel on margin integrity in primary and permanent teeth

Purpose This study compared the effectiveness of self-etch and total-etch adhesive systems in bonding to the beveled and nonbeveled margins of primary and permanent teeth. Methods This in vitro, factorial-designed study allowed evaluation of 3 factors: (1) tooth type; (2) presence of a bevel; and (3) adhesive type.Two preparations, each including a beveled and nonbeveled margin, were completed on buccal surfaces of 60 extracted molars (30 primary and 30 permanent). Preparations were randomly assigned to self-etch or a total-etch adhesive system and restored with resin composite. After thermocycling, teeth were stained with silver nitrate, sectioned, and measured for microleakage. Statistical analysis used a repeated measures analysis of variance. Results Beveled margins had less microleakage than nonbeveled margins for primary and permanent teeth (P<.001). Total-etch had less microleakage than self-etch adhesives on primary (53% less, P<.001) and on permanent teeth (22% less, P=.01). Self-etch had considerably more microleakage when enamel margins were not beveled. Comparably less microleakage, however, was found for total-etch and self-etch in restorations with beveled margins. Conclusions Total-etch adhesive and beveled margins resulted in the least microleakage. Margin beveling has a greater effect in minimizing microleakage than the type of adhesive used. Effect of adhesive systems and bevel on margin integrity in primary and permanent teeth Swanson TK, Feigal RJ,Tantbirojn D, Hodges JS Pediatr Dent. 2008;30:134-40. Objectives People with dental fear often suffer from other psychological disorders, as well as from a number of other specific fears. Fear of going to the dentist may be associated not only with general fearfulness, but also with underlying personality dispositions. This exploratory study, therefore, investigated the associations between dental fear and 67 other specific fears, general fearfulness, disgust sensitivity and harm sensitivity. Methods Participants were 88 Australian adults who were administered the Fear Survey Schedule III (FSS-III), the Harm Sensitivity Index and the Disgust Sensitivity Index. Principle axis factor analysis with Promax rotation was used to examine how dental fear related to other specific fears as measured with the FSS-III. Results Dental fear was significantly correlated with most of the other specific fears, with factor analysis indicating that it tended to load more with fears related to lack of control rather than with what have often been classed as ‘medical’ fears. Significant associations were found between dental fear and the personality dispositions of general fearfulness, harm sensitivity and disgust sensitivity, although these associations were not linear. Conclusions Findings reveal extensive co-occurrence of other specific fears with dental fear, while the associations of dental fear with personality traits suggest enduring aspects to dental fear which may translate into difficulties in fear alleviation. Dental fear was more related to a diverse range of fears relating to a loss of control than to medical-specific fears. A preliminary investigation of the relationship of dental fear to other specific fears, general fearfulness, disgust sensitivity and harm sensitivity Armfield JM Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2008;36:128-36. Purpose To investigate the influence of (1) osteoporosis on resorption of edentulous and (2) whether osteoporosis enhances implant loss. Materials and Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for association of osteoporosis and bone resorption/loss of implants. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined and quality assessment of the remaining studies after exclusion was performed.The Cochrane approach for cohort studies was applied. Results Methodologic assessment of the eligible publications using the Cochrane approach resulted in the inclusion of 11 publications in the final evaluation. Most studies dealt with the association between the extent of resorption or atrophy of edentulous jaws and the systemic (femoral, lumbar spine, metacarpal) bone mineral content (BMC) or bone mineral density (BMD) status. Four studies reported a significant association between the extent of resorption and the skeletal BMC and/or BMD. Four studies evaluated the effect of endosseous implants on mandibular BMC or BMD changes and the association between systematic BMD statuses and loss of implants. These studies revealed no association between systemic BMD status, mandibular BMD status, bone quality, and implant loss. Conclusions Although no firm conclusions could be drawn regarding the effect of osteoporosis on resorption of edentulous jaws, with or without implants, due to the different parameters applied in the various studies, the use of endosseous implants in osteoporosis patients is not contra-indicated. Osteoporosis and edentulous jaws Slatger KW, Raghoebar GM,Vissink A Int J Prosthodont. 2008;21:19-26. Primary Dental Care • July 2008 112