Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Dent Assoc. 2019 Apr 25;150(6):522–530. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.01.021

Table 3.

Percentage* and number of crowns that were bonded or not, overall and by crown or preparation characteristic

Crown or preparation characteristic N*** Bonded crowns, % (n) Non-bonded crowns, % (n) Comparisons
Overall 3468 38.1 (1321) 61.9 (2147) --
Preparation taper** p = .15
Excessive 194 62.9 (122) 37.1 (72)
Adequate 2924 35.0 (1025) 65.0 (1899)
Insufficient 92 32.6 (30) 67.4 (62)
Occlusal reduction** p = .02
Excessive 310 75.8 (235) 24.2 (75) a
Adequate 2734 33.0 (901) 67.0 (1833) b
Insufficient 165 24.2 (40) 75.8 (125) b
Axial reduction** p = .08
Excessive 202 67.3 (136) 32.7 (66)
Adequate 2920 34.5 (1008) 65.5 (1912)
Insufficient 87 37.9 (33) 62.1 (54)
Restorative material p < .01
Leucite-reinforced 17 76.5 (13) 23.5 (4) a
Lithium disiliciate 1012 70.9 (717) 29.1 (295) a
Layered zirconia 268 33.8 (104) 61.2 (164) b
Full contour zirconia 1131 30.1 (340) 69.9 (791) b
Full metal 177 14.7 (26) 85.3 (151) c
PFM 857 13.8 (118) 86.2 (738) c
Other 2 100 (2) 0 (0) ---
Location in arch p < .01
Anterior maxilla 228 43.0 (98) 57.0 (130) a
Posterior maxilla 1609 37.6 (605) 62.4 (1004) b
Anterior mandible 39 41.0 (16) 59.0 (23) a,b
Posterior mandible 1585 37.8 (599) 62.2 (986) b
Crown margin location p = .35
At or above 1432 39.9 (572) 60.1(860)
gingival crest
1 mm below gingival crest 1344 40.4 (543) 59.6 (801)
2 mm or more below gingival crest 688 29.7 (204) 70.35 (484)
*

Raw percentages are presented. P-values reflect adjustment for clustering within clinician, using mixed-model logistic regression. Categories with the same letter are not significantly different.

**

Based on assessment of the crown impression by the laboratory technician who made the prosthetic crown.

***

N = Numbers of crowns in row category. Total sample sizes vary due to the presence of missing values for some characteristics.