Attitudes of Senior Dental Students of Al Quds University towards Placement of Restorative Materials in Posterior Teeth

Tarek Rabi^1, and Hakam Rabi²

¹Al Quds University Department of Operative Dentistry Jerusalem Palestine

²Department of oral radiology and diagnosis, Al Quds University Palestine

Cite this paper:
Tarek Rabi and Hakam Rabi. Attitudes of Senior Dental Students of Al Quds University towards Placement of Restorative Materials in Posterior Teeth. International Journal of Dental Sciences and Research. 2015; 3(2):35-42. doi: 10.12691/ijdsr-3-2-4

Abstract

The aim of this article is to assess the attitude of senior dental students of college of dentistry, Al Quds University towards placement of direct restorative materials in posterior teeth. Amalgam is used conventionally in restoration of posterior teeth while the use of resin composites is on rise for the same purpose. The esthetic concern of the patients and safety concerns about use of amalgam are changing the conventional trends of posterior teeth restoration. Some dental schools have even declined the use of amalgam in their institutions. But the properties of amalgam such as its high strength and less wear over a period of time are still making it the best alternative for the posterior teeth restoration. This study was conducted to evaluate the attitude of the dental students towards the use of amalgam and resin composites in restoration of posterior teeth. A 20 items online questionnaire was sent to 82 fifth year dentistry students of Al Quds University. Out of them 69 students responded with a response rate of 84.1%. The questions involve influences of various factors on the choice of material for posterior teeth restoration. The size of the cavity is found to have almost equal influence in both the cases. Esthetic demand and patient’s choice also affect the choice of material strongly. Age of the patient doesn’t seem to affect much on the material choice. Moisture control was found critical in case of composite restoration. Patient’s pregnancy seems to strongly influence in case of amalgam restoration due to the safety concerns regarding the same. As per this study, the students seem to choose both the materials equally depending upon the case scenario.

Keywords:
Amalgam composite posterior teeth restoration Esthetic restoration amalgam safety

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Chalmers J.M. “Minimal Intervention Dentistry: Part 2. Strategies for Addressing Restorative Challenges in Older Patients”. JCDA. 72(5). 435-440. June 2006.
[2]	Christensen G.J. “Amalgam vs. composite resin: 1998”. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 129 (12). 1757-1759. Dec. 1998.
[3]	Mccomb D. “Class I and Class II silver amalgam and resin composite posterior restorations: teaching approaches in Canadian faculties of dentistry.” J. Can. Dent. Assoc., Ottawa. 71 (6). 405-406. June 2005.
[4]	Bernardo, M. et al. “Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial.” J. Am. Dent. Assoc., Chicago. 138 (6). 775-783. June 2007.
[5]	Mitchell, R.J.; Koike, M.; Okabe, T. “Posterior amalgam restorations--usage, regulation, and longevity.” Dent. Clin. North Am., Philadelphia. 51 (3). 573-589. Jul. 2007.
[6]	Van Nieuwenhuysen, J.P. “Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth”. J. Dent., Kidlington. 31 (6). 395-405. Aug. 2003.
[7]	ADA council. “Direct and indirect restorative materials”. JADA. 134 (4). 463-472. 2003.
[8]	Clifton JC. “Mercury exposure and Public health”. PediatrClin North Am. 54(2). 237-69. 2007. (online). Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pcl.2007.02.005. PMID 17448359.
[9]	Christenson GJ. “Remaining challenges with class 2 resin based composite restorations”. J Am Dent Assoc. 138.1487-1489. Nov. 2007.
[10]	Baratiere LN. Ritter AV. “Four year’s clinical evaluation of posterior resin based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique”. J Esther Restor Dent. 13. 50-57. 2001.
[11]	Roeters, F.J.; Opdam, N.J.; Loomans, B.A. “The amalgam-free dental school”. J. Dent., Kidlington. 32 (5). 371-377. Jul. 2004.
[12]	Wilson, N.H. “Curricular issues changing from amalgam to tooth-coloured materials”. J. Dent, Kidlington. 32 (5). 367-369. 2004.
[13]	Burke, F.J. “Amalgam to tooth-coloured materials--implications for clinical practice and dental education: governmental restrictions and amalgam-usage survey results”. J. Dent, Kidlington, 32 (5). 343-350. 2004.
[14]	Lynch C., Guillem S., Nagrani B., Gilmore S., Ericson D. “Attitudes of some European dental undergraduate students to the placement of direct restorative materials in posterior teeth”. J. Oral rehabilitation. 2010.
[15]	Simecek JW, Diefenderfer KE, Cohen ME. “An evaluation of replace-ment rates for posterior resin-based composite and amalgam restorations in US. Navy and marine corps recruits”. J Am Dent Assoc. 140 (2). 200-209. 2009.
[16]	Bohaty B.S., Misra A., Ye Q., Sene F., Spencer P. “Posterior composite restoration update: focus on factors influencing form and function”. Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry. 5. 33-42. 2013.
[17]	Adela Hervás García, Miguel Angel Martínez Lozano, Jose Cabanes Vila, Amaya Barjau Escribano, Pablo Fos Galve, “Composite resins. A review of the materials and clinical indications”. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 11. 215-20. 2006.
[18]	El-Mowafy OM, Lewis DW, Benmergui C, Levinton C. Meta-analysis on long-term clinical performance of posterior composite restorations. J Dent; 22 (1): 33-43. 1994.
[19]	Burke FJ, Shortall AC. Successful restorations of load-bearing cavities in pos-terior teeth with direct-replacement resin-based composite. Dent Update 28 (8): 388-94, 396, 398. 2001.
[20]	Okuda WH. “Achieving optimal aesthetics for direct and indirect restorations with microhybrid composite resins”. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 7. 177-84. 2005.
[21]	Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift EJ. Sturdevant's Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. Missouri: Mosby Inc; 2006.5.151-64.
[22]	Rathore.M., Singh.A. Pant V.A. “The Dental Amalgam Toxicity Fear: A Myth or Actuality”. Toxicol Int. 19 (2). 81-88. 2012.
[23]	U.S. Food and Drug administration Internet source: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DentalProducts/DentalAmalgam/ucm171094.htm
[24]	Marshall SJ, Marshall GW. “Jr Dental amalgam: The materials”. Adv Dent Res. 6. 94-9. 1992.
[25]	DeRouen TA, Martin MD, Leroux BG, Townes BD, Woods JS, Leitao J, et al. Neurobehavioral effects of dental amalgam in children: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA.; 295: 1784-1792. 2006.
[26]	Leinfelder KF. “Using composite resin as a posterior restorative material”. J Am Dent Assoc. 122 (4). 65-70. 1991.
[27]	Stephen J. Bonsor, Gavin Pearson. A Clinical Guide to Applied Dental Materials. Churchill Livingstone Elsevier publication, China, 2013. 92-93
[28]	Veneziani M. “Adhesive restorations in the posterior area with subgingival cervical margins: new classification and differentiated treatment approach”. Eur J Esthet Dent. 5 (1). 50-76. 2010.