Knowledge about composite restorations repair vs replacement- a survey among a subpopulation of saudi dental students
Objectives: the purpose of this study was to evaluate the knowledge among dental students at King Khalid University, Jazan University, and Najran University in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia about when to repair or replace defective direct composite restoration. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire-based survey was formulated, pursuing the information about management (repair/replacement) of defective composite restorations and distributed among 200 dental students of three universities in the southern region of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.The data were collected with the help of an online questionnaire. Data entry and the analysis were done using the statistical software package SPSS version 20.0. It was presented using descriptive statistics in the form of frequencies and percentages for qualitative variables, and range means and standard deviations for age, quantitative variable. Analytic statistics ere done using Chi-Square tests (x2) to test the significant difference between categorical variables. The level of significance, the p-value was 0.01 (p < 0.01). Results: The decision to choose between composite repair or replacement was influenced by whether this topic was taught to them at various undergraduate levels during Bachelor of Dental Surgery. The reason associated with the decision to repair defective composite restorations, 76% reported as cost-effective followed by Increased longevity (71%), the permanent filling (70%), patient’s preference for repair (65%), and least time consuming (50%). 67% participants preferred significantly (p<0.001) repair due to secondary caries in the previously restored tooth with composite, followed by the small surface defect in a composite restoration (65%), risk of pulpal damage significantly (p<0.001) in a defective composite restoration (62.5%) and more invasive and destructive treatment option (35%). More than half of respondents 123 (61.5%) reported that they were not taught about composite repair during the Bachelor of Dental Surgery. Conclusion: It is suggested with the help of our study that didactic and clinical training components regarding composite repair should be seriously included in the teaching curriculum of dental institutions as it is in the best interest of the patient. Dental students should be provided with clinical training on this topic so that they can follow proper decision-making protocols available during repair or replacement of defective resin composite restorations. Other researches in the future can be carried out for refining the guidelines and techniques utilized for composite repair.
Composite restoration; Discoloration; Polymerization shrinkage; Secondary caries.
Blum IR, Jagger DC, Wilson NH. Defective dental restorations: to repair or not to repair? Part 1: direct composite restorations. Dental update. 2011 Mar 2;38(2):78-84. doi: 10.12968/denu.2011.38.2.78
Lynch CD, Wilson NH. Managing the phase-down of amalgam: Part I. Educational and training issues. British dental journal. 2013 Aug;215(3):109-13. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.737
Catleugh MA, Merry AJ, Tickle M, Dunne SM, Brunton PA. Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite (Protocol). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;3:1-6. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005971.
Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Loomans BA, Huysmans MC. Longevity of repaired restorations: a practice based study. Journal of Dentistry. 2012 Oct 1;40(10):829-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.06.007
Gordan VV, MJÖR IA, Blum IR, Wilson N. Teaching students the repair of resin-based composite restorations: a survey of North American dental schools. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2003 Mar 1;134(3):317-23. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2003.0160
Gordan VV, Riley III JL, Worley DC, Gilbert GH, DPBRN Collaborative Group. Restorative material and other tooth-specific variables associated with the decision to repair or replace defective restorations: findings from The Dental PBRN. Journal of Dentistry. 2012 May 1;40(5):397-405.doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2012.02.001
Lynch CD, Frazier KB, McConnell RJ, Blum IR, Wilson NH. Minimally invasive management of dental caries: contemporary teaching of posterior resin-based composite placement in US and Canadian dental schools. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2011Jun1;142(6):612-20.
Gordan VV, Riley III JL, Geraldeli S, Rindal DB, Qvist V, Fellows JL, Kellum HP, Gilbert GH, Dental Practice-Based Research Network Collaborative Group. Repair or replacement of defective restorations by dentists in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2012 Jun 1;143(6):593-601. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2012.0238
Lynch CD, Frazier KB, McConnell RJ, Blum IR, Wilson NH. Minimally invasive management of dental caries: contemporary teaching of posterior resin-based composite placement in US and Canadian dental schools. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2011 Jun 1;142(6):612-20. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2011.0243
Blum IR, Lynch CD, Wilson NH. Teaching of the repair of defective composite restorations in Scandinavian dental schools. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2012 Mar;39(3):210-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2011.02260.x
Manhart J, Chen HY, Hamm G, Hickel R. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. OPERATIVE DENTISTRY-UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON-. 2004 Sep 1;29:481-508.
Gordan VV, Garvan CW, Blaser PK, Mondragon E, Mjör IA. A long-term evaluation of alternative treatments to replacement of resin-based composite restorations: results of a seven-year study. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2009 Dec 1;140(12):1476-84. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0098
Mjör IA, Moorhead JE, Dahl JE. Reasons for replacement of restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice. International dental journal. 2000 Dec;50(6):361-6. doi:10.1111/j.1875-595x.2000.tb00569.x
Goldstein GR. The longevity of direct and indirect posterior restorations is uncertain and may be affected by a number of dentist-, patient-, and material-related factors. Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice. 2010 Mar 1;10(1):30-1. doi:10.1016/j.jebdp.2009.11.015
Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2001 Mar 1;3(1):45-64.
Yousef MK, Khoja NH. Repair and replacement perception of dental restorations. Journal of King Abdulaziz University-Medical Sciences. 2009 Jan 4;16(1):75-85. doi: https://doi.org/10.4197/med.16-1.7
Kallio TT, Tezvergil-Mutluay A, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK. The effect of surface roughness on repair bond strength of light-curing composite resin to polymer composite substrate. The open dentistry journal. 2013;7:126-131. doi: 10.2174/1874210601307010126
Blum IR, Lynch CD, Wilson NH. Teaching of direct composite restoration repair in undergraduate dental schools in the United Kingdom and Ireland. European Journal of Dental Education. 2012 Feb;16(1):e53-8. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0579.2010.00674.x
Hickel R, Brüshaver K, Ilie N. Repair of restorations–criteria for decision making and clinical recommendations. Dental Materials. 2013 Jan 1;29(1):28-50. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2012.07.006
Tyas MJ, Anusavice KJ, Frencken JE, Mount GJ. Minimal intervention dentistry—a review* FDI Commission Project 1–97. International dental journal. 2000 Feb;50(1):1-2. doi:10.1111/j.1875-595x.2000.tb00540.x