Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations 4/2005

01-12-2005 | Review

Reprinting the classic article on USPHS evaluation methods for measuring the clinical research performance of restorative materials

Authors: Stephen C. Bayne, Gottfried Schmalz

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 4/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

The original article published by Cvar and Ryge in 1971 on the US Public Health Service (USPHS) Guidelines is virtually inaccessible to current scientists, despite its remarkable impact on clinical dental research. The original article described all the pilot studies that led to the choices for the final USPHS guidelines. However, many of the important basic ideas expressed in the original article, such as evaluator calibration, have been overlooked in recent years. Challenges for effective clinical testing of restorative procedures and materials that were emphasized by those authors are even more relevant today. Therefore, it is totally appropriate to republish the original article by Cvar and Ryge in this issue of Clinical Oral Investigations. This preface to the republication of the original article provides key background information and references to contributions by the many now-famous clinical investigators who were involved with pilot studies. In addition, the USPHS recommendations are critically reviewed. Clinical evaluation of restorative procedures requires (a) choices of clinically relevant criteria, (b) assessment using simple nominal scales, (c) calibration of evaluators, (d) two independent evaluations, and (e) nonparametric statistic analysis that recognizes the patient (and not the restoration) as the independent variable. Only portions of those procedures are being preserved in current clinical investigations. USPHS criteria continue in use until today as part of routine clinical evaluation and as components of standards programs such as the ADA acceptance program. However, in addition, USPHS-like criteria have been appended over the years to produce “modified USPHS guidelines.” These additional criteria include parameters such as postoperative sensitivity, fracture, interproximal contact, occlusal contact, and others. The combination of the original and modified USPHS criteria now have been accepted worldwide but are not necessarily uniformly applied. They constitute the foundation for current considerations of further development of clinical assessment methods for dental restorative procedures.
Literature
1.
go back to reference ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1989) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: composite resins for posterior restorations. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–13 ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1989) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: composite resins for posterior restorations. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–13
2.
go back to reference ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1996) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: restorative materials. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–14 ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1996) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: restorative materials. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–14
3.
go back to reference ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1998) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: products for treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–15 ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1998) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: products for treatment of dentinal hypersensitivity. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–15
4.
go back to reference ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1998) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: home use tooth-whitening products. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–14 ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (1998) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: home use tooth-whitening products. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–14
5.
go back to reference ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (2001) Revised American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: dentin and enamel adhesives. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–9 ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (2001) Revised American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: dentin and enamel adhesives. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–9
6.
go back to reference ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (2001) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: composite resins for posterior restorations. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–12 ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (2001) American Dental Association acceptance program guidelines: composite resins for posterior restorations. American Dental Association, Chicago, pp 1–12
7.
go back to reference Bader JD, Shugars DA, Rozier G, Lohr KN, Bonito AJ, Nelson JP, Jackman AM (2001) Diagnosis and management of dental caries. Evid Rep Technol Assess 36:1–4 Bader JD, Shugars DA, Rozier G, Lohr KN, Bonito AJ, Nelson JP, Jackman AM (2001) Diagnosis and management of dental caries. Evid Rep Technol Assess 36:1–4
8.
go back to reference Cantor R, Webber RL, Stroud L, Ryge G (1969) Methods for evaluating facial prosthetic materials. J Prosthet Dent 21:324–332PubMedCrossRef Cantor R, Webber RL, Stroud L, Ryge G (1969) Methods for evaluating facial prosthetic materials. J Prosthet Dent 21:324–332PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Cvar J, Ryge G (1971) Criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. US DHEW Document, US PHS 790244, Printing Office, San Francisco, pp 1–42 Cvar J, Ryge G (1971) Criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. US DHEW Document, US PHS 790244, Printing Office, San Francisco, pp 1–42
10.
go back to reference Jendresen MD, Phillips RW (1968) A clinical comparison of four posterior intermediate restorative materials. Technical report SAM-TR Dec, pp 1–10 Jendresen MD, Phillips RW (1968) A clinical comparison of four posterior intermediate restorative materials. Technical report SAM-TR Dec, pp 1–10
11.
go back to reference Ryge G (1966) Clinical evaluation of adhesive restorative materials. In: Austin RH, Wilsdorf HGF, Phillips RW (eds) Adhesive restorative dental materials II. Proceedings of a workshop held at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, December 8–9, 1965. National Institute of Dental Research, Public Health Service Publication No 1494 Ryge G (1966) Clinical evaluation of adhesive restorative materials. In: Austin RH, Wilsdorf HGF, Phillips RW (eds) Adhesive restorative dental materials II. Proceedings of a workshop held at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, December 8–9, 1965. National Institute of Dental Research, Public Health Service Publication No 1494
12.
go back to reference Ryge G (1977) Development of clinical testing of materials. In: RG Craig (ed) Dental materials review. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, pp 192–204 Ryge G (1977) Development of clinical testing of materials. In: RG Craig (ed) Dental materials review. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, pp 192–204
13.
go back to reference Ryge G (1980) Clinical criteria. Int Dent J 35:347–358 Ryge G (1980) Clinical criteria. Int Dent J 35:347–358
14.
go back to reference Ryge G, DeVincenzi RG (1983) Assessment of the clinical quality of health care. Search for a reliable method. Eval Health Prof 6:311–326PubMedCrossRef Ryge G, DeVincenzi RG (1983) Assessment of the clinical quality of health care. Search for a reliable method. Eval Health Prof 6:311–326PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Ryge G, Snyder M (1973) Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 87:369–377PubMed Ryge G, Snyder M (1973) Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 87:369–377PubMed
16.
go back to reference Ryge G, Jendresen MD, Glantz PO, Mjor I (1981) Standardization of clinical investigators for studies of restorative materials. Swed Dent J 5:235–239PubMed Ryge G, Jendresen MD, Glantz PO, Mjor I (1981) Standardization of clinical investigators for studies of restorative materials. Swed Dent J 5:235–239PubMed
17.
go back to reference Wilder AD, May KN, Bayne SC, Taylor DF, Leinfelder KF (1999) Seventeen-year clinical study of ultraviolet-cured posterior composite Class I and II restorations. J Esthet Dent 11:135–142PubMedCrossRef Wilder AD, May KN, Bayne SC, Taylor DF, Leinfelder KF (1999) Seventeen-year clinical study of ultraviolet-cured posterior composite Class I and II restorations. J Esthet Dent 11:135–142PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Reprinting the classic article on USPHS evaluation methods for measuring the clinical research performance of restorative materials
Authors
Stephen C. Bayne
Gottfried Schmalz
Publication date
01-12-2005
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 4/2005
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-005-0017-0

Other articles of this Issue 4/2005

Clinical Oral Investigations 4/2005 Go to the issue

Calendar of Events

Calendar of Events