Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations

Gülensu Türkyılmaz Açıl; Fatma Aytaç Bal; Begum Busra Cevval Ozkocak

doi:10.62243/edr.1814501

Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations

Abstract

Aim This multicenter cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the clinical longevity of direct restorations and to identify patient- and restoration-related factors affecting restoration failure in a Turkish population. Material and method A total of 2,366 direct restorations (1,676 composite, 660 amalgam, 30 glass ionomer) from 1,324 patients were clinically evaluated using the FDI World Dental Federation criteria. Patient-related factors (age, gender, oral hygiene, recall frequency, education level, treatment setting) and restoration-related factors (material type, service time) were recorded. Interactions were tested using the Pearson chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests (α = 0.05), and variables with p < 0.05 were entered into multivariate logistic regression models to identify independent predictors of failure. Results Restoration fracture (15.1%), secondary caries (13.4%), and discoloration (12.1%) were the most frequent causes of failure, followed by overhanging restoration (10.0%) and anatomical form loss (9.8%). Longer restoration age, treatment in public dental centers, poor oral hygiene, irregular recall frequency, and low education level were significantly associated with higher failure rates (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression identified poor oral hygiene (OR = 2.48), irregular recall (OR = 2.10), restoration age > 5 years (OR = 1.61), female gender (OR = 1.46), and age ≥ 35 years (OR = 1.80) as independent predictors of failure. Conclusion Both patient- and restoration-related factors significantly influence the clinical longevity of direct restorations. Regular recall visits, good oral hygiene habits, and appropriate clinical procedures are essential for long-term success.

Keywords

Project Number

Not applicable.

Ethical Statement

The study protocol was approved by the Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University Clinical Research Ethics Committee (No: 2019/98)

References

Hickel, R., Brüshaver, K., & Ilie, N. (2013). Repair of restorations: Criteria for decision making and clinical recommendations. Dental Materials, 29(1), 28–50.
Demarco, F. F., Collares, K., Correa, M. B., Cenci, M. S., Moraes, R. R., & Opdam, N. J. (2017). Should my composite restorations last forever? Why are they failing? Brazilian Oral Research, 31(Suppl. 1), e56.
Opdam, N. J., van de Sande, F. H., Bronkhorst, E., Cenci M. S., Bottenberg, P., Pallesen, U., et al. (2014). Longevity of posterior composite restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dental Research, 93(10), 943–949.
Ansari, S. H., Alkhalil, G., & Alhaj, S. (2023). Longevity of posterior composite restorations and their reasons for failure: A systematic review. Archives of Pharmacy Practice, 14(3), 14–20.
Shah, A., Radadiya, H., Manocha, S., Riter, H., Oyoyo, U., & Kwon, S. R. (2024). Survival rate of direct posterior composite resin restorations at a Southern California dental school. Journal of the California Dental Association, 52(1), 2438977.
Tennert, C., Maliakal, C., Suarèz Machado, L., Jaeggi, T., Meyer-Lueckel, H., & Wierichs, R. J. (2024). Longevity of posterior direct versus indirect composite restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dental Materials, 40(11), e95–e101.
Josic, U., D’Alessandro, C., Miletic, V., Maravic, T., Mazzitelli, C., Jacimovic, J., et al. (2023). Clinical longevity of direct and indirect posterior resin composite restorations: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Dental Materials, 39(12), 1085–1094.
Demarco, F. F., Corrêa, M. B., Cenci, M. S., Moraes, R. R., & Opdam, N. J. (2012). Longevity of posterior composite restorations: Not only a matter of materials. Dental Materials, 28(1), 87–101.

Heintze, S. D., & Rousson, V. (2012). Clinical effectiveness of direct Class II restorations: A meta-analysis. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 14(5), 407–431.
Casagrande, L., Laske, M., Bronkhorst, E. M., Huysmans, M. C. D. N. J. M., & Opdam, N. J. (2017). Repair may increase survival of direct posterior restorations: A practice-based study. Journal of Dentistry, 64, 30–36.
Santos, M. J. M. C., Zare, E., McDermott, P., & Santos Junior, G. C. (2024). Multifactorial contributors to the longevity of dental restorations: An integrated review of related factors. Dentistry Journal, 12(9), 291.
Heintze, S. D., Rousson, V., & Hickel, R. (2015). Clinical effectiveness of direct anterior restorations: A meta-analysis. Dental Materials, 31(5), 481–495.
Ulku, S. G., & Unlu, N. (2024). Factors influencing the longevity of posterior composite restorations: A dental university clinic study. Heliyon, 10(6), e27735.
Akgül, N., Yilmaz, E., Akkurt, O., et al. (2025). Turkish dentist practice and opinions on diagnosing and treating deep caries lesions: A web-based survey. BMC Oral Health, 25, 200.
Mumcu, G., Sur, H., Yildirim, C., Soylemez, D., Atli, H., & Hayran, O. (2004). Utilisation of dental services in Turkey: A cross-sectional survey. International Dental Journal, 54(2), 90–96.
Korkut, B., & Özcan, M. (2022). Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in maxillary anterior crown fractures: A 4-year clinical evaluation. Operative Dentistry, 47(2), 138–148.
Usta, S. N., Cömert-Pak, B., Karaismailoğlu, E., Eymirli, A., & Deniz-Sungur, D. (2022). Patterns of post-endodontic restoration: A nationwide survey of dentists in Turkey. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(3), 1794.
Patel, P., Kapadia, U., Vyas, J., Mhay, S., & Nalliah, R. P. (2024). Determining the failure rate of direct restorations: Chart review versus electronic health record reports. Dentistry Journal, 12(8), 250.
Katırcıoğlu, S. K., Pertek Hatipoğlu, F., & Hatipoğlu, Ö. (2023). Evaluation of dentists in Turkey: Coronal restoration preferences for endodontically treated teeth. Eurasian Dental Research, 1(2), 26–32.
van Dijken, J. W., & Pallesen, U. (2013). A six-year prospective randomized study of a nano-hybrid and a conventional hybrid resin composite in Class II restorations. Dental Materials, 29(2), 191–198.
Murchie, B., Jiwan, N., & Edwards, D. (2025). What are the success rates of anterior restorations used in localised wear cases? Evidence-Based Dentistry, 26(1), 54–56.
Hatipoğlu, O., & Arıcıoğlu, B. (2019). Repair versus replacement: A questionnaire examining the repair preferences of Turkish dentists in dental restorations. International Journal of Oral and Dental Health, 5, 077.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Restorative Dentistry

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Gülensu Türkyılmaz Açıl
0000-0001-5632-0191
Türkiye

Fatma Aytaç Bal ^*
0000-0003-2379-4678
Türkiye

Begum Busra Cevval Ozkocak
0000-0002-6371-5420
Türkiye

Publication Date

December 31, 2025

Submission Date

October 31, 2025

Acceptance Date

November 21, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Volume: 3 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.62243/edr.1814501

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA73SY76PY

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Türkyılmaz Açıl, G., Aytaç Bal, F., & Cevval Ozkocak, B. B. (2025). Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations. Eurasian Dental Research, 3(3), 58-62. https://doi.org/10.62243/edr.1814501

AMA

1.Türkyılmaz Açıl G, Aytaç Bal F, Cevval Ozkocak BB. Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations. EDR. 2025;3(3):58-62. doi:10.62243/edr.1814501

Chicago

Türkyılmaz Açıl, Gülensu, Fatma Aytaç Bal, and Begum Busra Cevval Ozkocak. 2025. “Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations”. Eurasian Dental Research 3 (3): 58-62. https://doi.org/10.62243/edr.1814501.

EndNote

Türkyılmaz Açıl G, Aytaç Bal F, Cevval Ozkocak BB (December 1, 2025) Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations. Eurasian Dental Research 3 3 58–62.

IEEE

[1]G. Türkyılmaz Açıl, F. Aytaç Bal, and B. B. Cevval Ozkocak, “Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations”, EDR, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 58–62, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.62243/edr.1814501.

ISNAD

Türkyılmaz Açıl, Gülensu - Aytaç Bal, Fatma - Cevval Ozkocak, Begum Busra. “Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations”. Eurasian Dental Research 3/3 (December 1, 2025): 58-62. https://doi.org/10.62243/edr.1814501.

JAMA

1.Türkyılmaz Açıl G, Aytaç Bal F, Cevval Ozkocak BB. Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations. EDR. 2025;3:58–62.

MLA

Türkyılmaz Açıl, Gülensu, et al. “Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations”. Eurasian Dental Research, vol. 3, no. 3, Dec. 2025, pp. 58-62, doi:10.62243/edr.1814501.

Vancouver

1.Gülensu Türkyılmaz Açıl, Fatma Aytaç Bal, Begum Busra Cevval Ozkocak. Patient and Restoration Related Factors Influencing The Clinical Longevity of Direct Restorations. EDR. 2025 Dec. 1;3(3):58-62. doi:10.62243/edr.1814501