• Publications
  • Influence
Longevity and Cariostatic Effects of Everyday Conventional Glass-ionomer and Amalgam Restorations in Primary Teeth: Three-year Results
The aim of this study was to compare the longevity and cariostatic effects of everyday conventional glass-ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth. The materials consisted of 515 Ketac-FilExpand
  • 109
  • 3
Class II restorations in primary teeth: 7-year study on three resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer.
The aim of this randomized study was to compare the longevity and cariostatic effects of 1565 class II restorations in primary teeth placed by 15 clinicians in the Danish Public Dental Health ServiceExpand
  • 69
  • 3
Comparison between new saliva stimulants in patients with dry mouth: a placebo-controlled double-blind crossover study.
Two new saliva stimulants: V6 and a mucin containing chewing gum were tested in this placebo-controlled double-blind crossover study. Forty-three patients (mean age 63 yr) complaining of dry mouthExpand
  • 47
  • 1
Eight‐year study on conventional glass ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth
The aim of this randomized clinical study was to compare the longevity and the cariostatic effects of conventional glass ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth placed in everyday practiceExpand
  • 62
  • 1
The longevity of different restorations in primary teeth.
BACKGROUND AND AIM This paper reviews three published papers and adds results from a fourth study which aimed to determine which restorative material would be the best alternative(s) to amalgam (AM)Expand
  • 55
  • 1
Resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer restorations in primary teeth: 8-year results.
OBJECTIVES To compare the longevity and cariostatic effects of resin-modified (RMGIC) and conventional glass ionomer (GIC) restorations in primary teeth in the Danish Public Dental Health Service. Expand
  • 59
  • 1
Eight-year study on conventional glass ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth
Abstracts on this page have been chosen and edited by Dr Trevor WattsAbstractFailure rates were higher for glass ionomer (GIC), but caries progression was more likely on tooth surfaces adjacent toExpand
  • 7
  • 1
Fluorides leaching from restorative materials and the effect on adjacent teeth.
OBJECTIVE Placing a Class II restoration in a tooth changes the local environment, including that for the adjacent tooth. Apart from the change to a less- or non-cariogenic environment for theExpand
  • 22