The dimensions of everyday class-II cavity preparations for amalgam

References

• Black G V. Probabilities. Am J Dent Sci 1875; 8: 241
   Google Scholar
• Ottolengui R. Extension for prevention. Dent Items Int 1901; 23: 322–33
   Google Scholar
• Kells C E. Three score years and nine. Lakeside Press, Chicago 1926
   Google Scholar
• Black G V. Limitatign of extension for prevention. Dent Summary 1904; 24: 173–7
   Google Scholar
• Sigurjons H. Extension for prevention. Historical development and current status of GV Blacks concept. Oper Dent 1983; 8: 57–63
   Google Scholar
• O'Hara J W, Clark L L. The evolution of the contemporary cavity preparation. J Am Dent Assoc 1984; 108: 993–7
   Google Scholar
• Lund M R. The development of amalgam preparations. The dental annual. Wright, Bristol 1985; 131–9
   Google Scholar
• Fischer C H. Fortschritte in der zahnerhaltung durch neue werkstoffe. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1971; 26: 228–34
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parfitt J B, Herbert W E. Operative dental surgery 6th ed. Edward Arnold and Co., London 1948
   Google Scholar
• Gordon J, Morris A. A new approach to cavity preparation. Br Dent J 1950; 88: 302
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pickard H M. Everyday procedures in dentistry. Cavity preparation for amalgam fillings. Br Dent J 1954; 96: 59–65
   Google Scholar
• Thomas A E. Evaluation of principles of cavity preparation design. Ala J Med Sci 1970; 20: 379–82
   Google Scholar
• Gilmore H W. New concepts for the amalgam restoration. Henry Kimpton Dental Monographs, London 1964
   Google Scholar
• DeBoer J G. Extension for prevention. Ned T Tandheelk 1965; 72: 427–39
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Knight T. Trends in cavity design. J Dent Assoc S Afr 1966; 21: 247–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mosteller J H. The relation between operative dentistry and periodontal disease. J Am Dent Assoc 1953; 47: 6–14
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ramfjord S P. Periodontal aspects of restorative dentistry. J Oral Rehabil 1974; 1: 107–26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bernier J L, Knapp M J, Boyers R C. Pros and cons on high-speed rotary instruments. Dent Progr 1960; 1: 47
   Google Scholar
• Stanley H R. Pulpal response to dental techniques and materials. Dent Clin N Am 1971; 15: 115–26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guard W F. A study of stress pattern variations in buccal-lingual sections of class II cavity restorations as a result of different cavity forms [Thesis]. University of Nebraska, Lincoln 1954
   Google Scholar
• Gabel A B. Present-day concepts of cavity preparation. Dent Clin N Am 1957; 1: 3–17
   Google Scholar
• Judes H. Improved cavity design for amalgam restorations. Isr J Dent Med 1975; 24: 28–30
   Google Scholar
• Ingraham R, Tanner H M. The adaption of modern instruments and increased operating speeds to restorative procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 1953; 47: 311–23
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McEwen R A. High speed preparations. Dent Clin North Am 1957; 1: 31–42
   Google Scholar
• Kilpatrick H C. High speed and ultra speed in dentistry. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia 1959
   Google Scholar
• Motsch A. Rationalisierung in der konservierenden zahnheitkunde. Dtsch Zahnaerztl Z 1969; 23: 347–54
   Google Scholar
• Dreeser H P. Die drehzalabhanige priparation. Ein beitrag zur rationalisierung der praparationsarbeit. Dtsch Stomatol 1972; 22: 868–89
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eames W B, Nale J L. A comparison of cutting efficiency of air-driven fissue burs. J Am Dent Assoc 1973; 86: 412–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kinzer R L, Morris C. Instruments and instrumentation to promote conservative operative dentistry. Dent Clin N Am 1976; 20: 241–58
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Osadetez C J. Conservative amalgam instrumentation. Ont Dent J 1977; 51: 18–21
   Google Scholar
• Welk D A, Laswell H R. Rationalc for designing cavitv preparations. Dent Clin N Am 1985; 29: 241–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vale W A. Cavity preparation. Ir Dent Rev 1956; 2: 33–41
   Google Scholar
• Re G, Norling B K. Fracturing molars with axial forces. J Dent Res 1981; 60: 805–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Re G J, Norling B K, Draheim R N. Fracture strength of molars containing three surface amalgam restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1982; 47: 185–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cavel W T, Kelsey W P, Blankenau R J. An in vivo study of cuspal fracture. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 53: 38–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadal R, Phillips R W, Swartz M. Clinical investigation on the relation of mercury to the amalgam restorations. II. J Am Dent Assoc 1961; 51: 489–96
   Google Scholar
• Berry T G, Laswell H R, Osborne J W, Gale E N. Width of isthmus and marginal failure of amalgam. Oper Dent 1981; 6: 55–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birtcil RF, Jr, Pelzner R B, Stark M M. A 30-month clinical evaluation of the influence of finishing and size of restoration on the margin performance of five amalgam alloys. J Dent Res 1981; 60: 1949–56
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldberg J, Munster E, Rydinge E, Sanchez L, Lamhert K. Experimental design in the clinical evaluation of amalgam restorations. J Biomed Mater Res 1980; 14: 777–88
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bell J G, Smith M C, de Pont J J. Cuspal fracture of MOD restored teeth. Aust Dent J 1982; 27: 283–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Powell G L, Nicholls J I, Rolver M P. Influence of matrix bands, dehydration and amalgam condensation on deformation of teeth. Oper Dent 1980; 5: 95–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krainau R. Verformungsmessung an kavitten der klasse II unter matrizenbandeinwirkung [Thesis]. University of Gottingen, Gottingen 1985
   Google Scholar
• Krainau R, Meyer G, Vogel A, Lauterborn W. Kavittsdeformation unter matrizeneinwirkung-Messungen mit hilfe granulationsoptischer methoden. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1987; 42: 102–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bell J G. An elementary study of deformation of molar teeth during amalgam restorative procedures. Aust Dent J 1977; 22: 177–81
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Braly B V, Maxwell E H. Potential for tooth fracture in restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1981; 45: 411–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cameron D E. The cracked tooth syndrome. J Am Dent Assoc 1964; 68: 405–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimaldi J R. Measurement of lateral deformation of the tooth crown under axial compressive cuspal loading [Thesis]. University of Otago, Otago 1971
   Google Scholar
• Snyder D E. The cracked tooth syndrome and fractured posterior cusps. Oral Surg 1976; 41: 698–704
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rosen H. Cracked tooth syndrome. J Prosthet Dent 1981; 47: 36–13
   Google Scholar
• Fisher F J. Toothache and cracked cusps. Br Dent J 1982; 153: 298–300
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Salk G F, Hood J A, Stokes A N, Lirk E E. Impact fracture of natural teeth. J Dent Res 1985; 64: 651
   Google Scholar
• Lemmens L M, Peters C R, Van't Hof M A, Letzel H. Influence on the bulk fracture incidence of amalgam restorations: a 7-year controlled clinical trial. Dent Mater 1987; 3: 90–3
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mannerberg F. Frilägging av präparationsgränsen. Tandlakartidningen 1973; 65: 26–30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wheeler R C. Dental anatomy. physiology and occlusion 5th ed. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia 1974
   Google Scholar
• Block P L. Restorative margins and periodontal health: A new look at an old perspective. J Prosthet Dent 1987; 57: 6839
   Google Scholar
• Björn A L, Björn H. Grkovic B. Marginal fit of restorations and its relation to periodontal bone level. Odontol Rev 1969; 20: 311–21
   Google Scholar
• Hansen B F. Marginal fit of dental restorations in a 35 ycar old Norwegian urban population. Dentomax Fac Radiol 1980; 9: 78–80
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Steffensen B. PrEpareringsgraensens cervikale placering. En literaturoversigt. Tandlaegebl 1983; 87: 389–96
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arneberg P, Silness J, Nordbø H. Marginal fit and cervical extent of class II amalgam restoration related to periodontal condition. A clinical and roentgenological study of overhang elimination. J Periodont Res 1980; 15: 669–77
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laswell H R. A prevalence study of secondary caries occurring in a young adult male population [Thesis]. University of Indiana, Indianapolis 1966
   Google Scholar
• Spens E. Vergleichende untersuchungen iiber die haufigkeit des auftretens der sekundaren randkaries. Dtsch Stomatol 1972; 22: 90–100
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eide R, Birkeland J M. Revisjon av fyllinger lokalisasjon av defekter. Nor Tannlegeforen Tid 1982; 92: 159–62
   Google Scholar
• Mjor I A, Smith D C. Detailed evaluation of six class 2 amalgam restorations. Oper Dent 1985; 10: 17–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fredriksen G. The measures of human teeth [Thesis]. University of Oslo, Oslo 1970
   Google Scholar
• Mahler D B. An analysis of stresses in a dental amalgam restoration. J Dent Res 1958; 37: 516–26
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fusayama T. Enamel cavity amalgam filling. Jpn J Conservative Dent 1971; 33: 171–5
   Google Scholar
• Espelid I, Tveit A B. Radiographic diagnosis of mineral loss in approximal enamel. Caries Res 1984; 18: 1141–8
   Google Scholar
• Nuttall N M, Elderton R J. The nature of restorative dental treatment decisions. BrDent J 1983; 154: 201–6
   Google Scholar
• Elderton R J. Treatment variation in restorative dentistry. Rest Dent 1984; 1: 3–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Merrett M C, Elderton R J. An in vitro study of restorative dentistry treatment decisions and dental caries. Br Dent J 1984; 157: 128–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne J W, Hoffman R, Ferguson G W. Conservation of tooth structure. J Ala Dent Assoc 1972; 56: 24–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sturdevant C M, Barton R E, Sockwell C L, Strickland W D. The art and science of operative dentistry 2nd ed. The C.V. Mosby Co., St Louis 1985
   Google Scholar
• Christensen D O. Temperature and stress profiles in teeth during cavity preparation [Thesis]. University of Utah, Salt Lake City 1973
   Google Scholar
• Pearlman S. The cutting edge. Interfacial dynamics of cutting and grinding. DHEW publ (NIH). 1976; 76–670
   Google Scholar
• Brown W S, Christensen D O, Lloyd B A. Numerical and experimental evaluation of energy inputs, temperature gradients and thermal stresses during restorative procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 1978; 96: 451–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eichner K. Normal-, hoch und hochsttouriges bohren und schleifen von zahnartsubstanzen. Hanser Verlag, Munich 1966
   Google Scholar
• Henry E E, Peyton F A. The relationship between design and cutting efficiency of dental burs. J Dent Res 1954; 33: 281–92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lester K S. Burs, teeth and hand instruments. Austral Dent J 1978; 23: 231–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cavity preparations, Project ACORDE. National Audiovisual Center, Washington DC 1975; 121–70
   Google Scholar
• van Achter D. Are Black's cavity preparations still of value?. Rev Belg Med Dent 1967; 22: 399–410
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elderton R J. New approaches to cavity design. Br Dent J 1984; 157: 421–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wolff M S. Conservative technique results in better restorations. Dent Stud 1981; 60: 32–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar