Table 3.
Logistic regressions in total (model 1) and separated by type of crown (model 2 and 3) with survival as dependent variable and potential discriminatory variables as independents.
| Model 1, Total (survival: yes = 488/no = 107) |
Model 2, Composite crowns (survival: yes = 211/no = 86) |
Model 3, Metal–ceramic crowns (survival: yes = 277/no = 21) |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Independents | OR | 95% CI | p | OR | 95% CI | p | OR | 95% CI | p |
| Type of crown | |||||||||
| Composite 0/MC 1 | 5.2 | 3.1–8.8 | <0.001 | ||||||
| Gender | |||||||||
| Men 0/Women 1 | 1.4 | 0.9–2.2 | 0.132 | 1.7 | 1.0–2.9 | 0.039 | 0.7 | 0.3–1.7 | 0.401 |
| Tooth position
a
| |||||||||
| Premolar 0/Molar 1 | 1.3 | 0.8–2.1 | 0.251 | 1.1 | 0.7–2.0 | 0.628 | 1.9 | 0.7–4.8 | 0.193 |
| Endodontic status | |||||||||
| No RCT | 0.499 | 0.814 | 0.169 | ||||||
| RCT with post 1 | 0.9 | 0.5–1.5 | 0.9 | 0.5–1.6 | 1.0 | 0.4–2.8 | |||
| RCT without post 2 | 0.7 | 0.4–1.3 | 0.8 | 0.4–1.6 | 0.3 | 0.1–1.1 | |||
Significant p values in italic.
Nagelkerke r 2 = 0.147 (model 1), 0.024 (model 2) and 0.048 (model 3).
aTooth position categorized into premolar or molar irrespective of jaw.