General Report Contents
• Market Analyses include: Unit Sales, ASPs, Market Value & Growth Trends
• Market Drivers & Limiters for each chapter segment
• Competitive Analysis for each chapter segment
• Section on recent mergers & acquisitions
The aging American population is by far the main driver of the dental materials market. As the baby boomer generation reaches retirement, their dental needs compound. This generation reached 70 years of age in 2016. They are projected to live longer than previous generations, and therefore are more likely to invest in their teeth during the remainder of their lives. Consequently, the demand for dental materials will increase due to this generation’s need for more crowns and bridges and other indirect restorations.
One major trend within the dental material market is the continual improvement of delivery systems, which are tailored towards reducing material waste. As these developments help dentists scavenge materials, the need to purchase additional material is reduced. Newer technologies such as capsules/unit dose dispensers significantly decrease the amount of wasted material for each dental procedure. The average doctor reports more than 100% waste when using dental cements. Capsules are one of the most expensive delivery methods, their prevention of waste can significantly lower the amount of permanent cement refills purchased by dentists. The same principle applies to direct restoratives with unit dose capsules and auto-mix machines, to dental impressions with cartridges and auto-mix machines and to bonding agents with unit dose capsules and lollipops. Core build-up materials are also threatened by waste prevention due to innovative delivery systems such as the pre-mixed pens and single component materials. Additionally, improvements of the traditional anesthetic delivery systems partake in waste prevention, and are expected to further innovate in the coming years.
The three main competitors have upheld their share of the dental material market over the years due to a multitude of factors. In addition to a long history of acquisitions, the dominance of both 3M ESPE and Kerr is largely due to having a presence in all segments of the dental material arena, with the exception of local anesthetics. DENTSPLY Caulk/Pharmaceutical goes one step further, with its primary advantage stemming from its participation in all the segments of the dental material market in 2016. Dentists also prefer 3M ESPE products for the reason that they have been in the market for a long time, and therefore have been the subject of many academic studies, proving as highly effective materials. 3M ESPE accentuates its reputation on the market by investing a heavy bulk of finances into improving the durability and longevity of its materials. Kerr achieved its status by continually being the golden standard for amalgam materials. DENTSPLY Caulk continued to lead the VPS impression material segment, being the material of choice in prestigious dental schools, such as the University of Pennsylvania, for years. With these innovations and the competitors' excellent reputation, this trio of companies are expected to maintain its market share in the dental material market over the next decade.
'
TABLE OF CONTENTS I
LIST OF FIGURES III
LIST OF CHARTS IV
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
U.S. DENTAL MATERIALS MARKET OVERVIEW 1
COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS 4
MARKET TRENDS 7
MARKET DEVELOPMENTS 9
MARKETS INCLUDED 10
KEY REPORT UPDATES 13
VERSION HISTORY 13
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 14
1.1 RESEARCH SCOPE 14
1.2 IDATA’S 9-STEP METHODOLOGY 14
Step 1: Project Initiation & Team Selection 14
Step 2: Prepare Data Systems and Perform Secondary Research 16
Step 3: Preparation for Interviews & Questionnaire Design 17
Step 4: Performing Primary Research 18
Step 5: Research Analysis: Establishing Baseline Estimates 20
Step 6: Market Forecast and Analysis 21
Step 7: Identify Strategic Opportunities 23
Step 8: Final Review and Market Release 24
Step 9: Customer Feedback and Market Monitoring 25
U.S. DENTAL MATERIALS MARKET OVERVIEW 26
2.1 INTRODUCTION 26
2.1.1 Impression Materials 26
2.1.1.1 Alginate 26
2.1.1.2 Polyether 27
2.1.1.3 Vinyl Polysiloxane 27
2.1.2 Direct Restorative Materials 27
2.1.2.1 Amalgam 28
2.1.2.2 Composites 28
2.1.2.3 GI and RMGI Materials 28
2.1.3 Temporary Restorative Materials 29
2.1.4 Bonding Agents 29
2.1.4.1 Total-Etch Systems 29
2.1.4.2 Self-Etch Systems 30
2.1.4.3 Universal-Etch Systems 30
2.1.5 Core Build-Up Materials 30
2.1.6 Dental Cements 31
2.1.6.1 Temporary Cements 31
2.1.6.2 Permanent Cements 32
2.1.7 Dental Local Anesthetics 32
2.2 MARKET OVERVIEW 34
2.3 TREND ANALYSIS BY SEGMENT 40
2.4 DRIVERS AND LIMITERS 44
2.4.1 Market Drivers 44
2.4.2 Market Limiters 45
2.5 COMPETITIVE MARKET SHARE ANALYSIS 48
2.6 MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS 63
ABBREVIATIONS 64
Chart 1 1: Dental Materials Market by Segment, U.S., 2013 – 2023 3
Chart 1 2: Dental Materials Market Overview, U.S., 2016 & 2023 3
Chart 2 1: Dental Materials Market by Segment, U.S., 2013 – 2023 38
Chart 2 2: Dental Materials Market Breakdown, U.S., 2016 39
Chart 2 3: Dental Materials Market Breakdown, U.S., 2023 39
Chart 2 4: Growth Rates by Segment, Dental Materials Market, U.S., 2013 – 2023 43
Chart 2 5: Leading Competitors, Dental Materials Market, U.S., 2016 62
Brainlab
Medtronic
Stryker
Aesculap Inc.
Medtech Surgical
Mazor Robotics
Intuitive Surgical
Accuray
Hansen Medical
Renishaw
Corindus Vascular Robotics
Catheter Precision
Stereotaxis
Smith & Nephew
