Michael Naumann1, Saskia Kiessling, Rainer Seemann. 1. Department of Prosthodontics and Geriatric Dentistry, Charite, University Medical School, Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany. michael.naumann@charite.de
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Opinions concerning proper restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) vary. A variety of techniques and materials for post-and-core restorations are available. The rationale for post placement performed by German dentists was unknown. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine current opinions, applied techniques, and materials for the restoration of ETT in Germany. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A nationwide questionnaire-based survey containing 18 multiple choice questions regarding treatment philosophies, favored post type, and materials for core foundations was mailed to 36,500 German general dentists. A total of 6029 questionnaires (16.5%) were returned. Data were evaluated in terms of the dentists' occupational experience and the frequency of post placement. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Irrespective of their occupational experience, 52% of the surveyed dentists consider post placement for almost every postendodontic restoration of ETT. The majority of dentists (54%) believe that a post reinforces ETT. Cast posts and cores are used by 55% of all dentists, whereas 34% use prefabricated posts exclusively. Screw posts are the most popular prefabricated post type (47%). Composite resin (51%) is preferred for core foundation, followed by glass ionomer cements (GICs) (26%). Amalgam is seldom used (0.5%). Posts are placed primarily with zinc phosphate cement (51%), followed by GIC (38%). CONCLUSION: The treatment philosophy of German dentists is not in complete agreement with recommendations found in the literature. The belief that a post would reinforce an ETT might explain the high frequency of post placements. Due to the partially inconsistent responses, it is difficult to derive a generalized treatment concept.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Opinions concerning proper restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) vary. A variety of techniques and materials for post-and-core restorations are available. The rationale for post placement performed by German dentists was unknown. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine current opinions, applied techniques, and materials for the restoration of ETT in Germany. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A nationwide questionnaire-based survey containing 18 multiple choice questions regarding treatment philosophies, favored post type, and materials for core foundations was mailed to 36,500 German general dentists. A total of 6029 questionnaires (16.5%) were returned. Data were evaluated in terms of the dentists' occupational experience and the frequency of post placement. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Irrespective of their occupational experience, 52% of the surveyed dentists consider post placement for almost every postendodontic restoration of ETT. The majority of dentists (54%) believe that a post reinforces ETT. Cast posts and cores are used by 55% of all dentists, whereas 34% use prefabricated posts exclusively. Screw posts are the most popular prefabricated post type (47%). Composite resin (51%) is preferred for core foundation, followed by glass ionomer cements (GICs) (26%). Amalgam is seldom used (0.5%). Posts are placed primarily with zinc phosphate cement (51%), followed by GIC (38%). CONCLUSION: The treatment philosophy of German dentists is not in complete agreement with recommendations found in the literature. The belief that a post would reinforce an ETT might explain the high frequency of post placements. Due to the partially inconsistent responses, it is difficult to derive a generalized treatment concept.
Authors: Gergo Mitov; Michael Dörr; Frank P Nothdurft; Florian Draenert; Peter R Pospiech Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2014-10-04 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Margrit-Ann Geibel; S Carstens; U Braisch; A Rahman; M Herz; A Jablonski-Momeni Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2017-02-23 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Sıla Nur Usta; Begüm Cömert-Pak; Eda Karaismailoğlu; Ayhan Eymirli; Derya Deniz-Sungur Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-04 Impact factor: 3.390