Re-intervention in restorative dentistry: Knowledge and attitudes of senegalese dentists

Abstract

Replacing or repairing a defective restoration has become a daily practice in dentistry. It is therefore necessary to know how to evaluate a restoration to decide whether or not to re-intervene and then to choose whether to replace, repair, or refrain from doing so by setting up a monitoring system. The best-known evaluation criteria accepted by the scientific community are the modified Ryge / USPHS criteria and the FDI criteria. In Senegal, no such study has been carried out, and it was with this in mind that our study was carried out, involving 158 dental surgeons. The results showed a predominance of men (70.89%). The average age was relatively young at 37. The study confirmed that re-intervention is common practice among the dentists surveyed: the majority (77.72%) had done a re-intervention less than a week before the survey. The most common reason encountered by dentists for their last re-intervention was fracture of the tooth or restorative material with a rate of 36.71%, then we have caries recurrence and advanced decay and wear with the same rate of 17.09%, followed by pain or hypersensitivity with a rate of 16.46%. After diagnosis, 73% replaced the restoration deemed defective, versus 22% who chose to repair the restoration. Clinical evaluation criteria were used by only 12.66% of the sample. The majority, 74.05% of practitioners, take into account the benefit/risk/cost ratio. The results of this study show the limits of dental surgeons' knowledge in re-intervention, as well as the lack of codification of parameters related to this practice. It is therefore necessary to develop training programs and teaching units for both initial and continuing training.