Richard S Kahan1. 1. Academy for Advanced Endodontics Harley Street, London, W1G 6AQ.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess adoption of endodontic nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary technology by general dental practitioners and identify factors influencing its uptake. DESIGN: Postal questionnaire. SETTING: General dental practitioners working in Wales. METHODS: General dental practitioners (n = 584) were approached regarding their usage or otherwise of nickel-titanium rotary instrumentation during root canal shaping. The postal questionnaire took the form of an anonymous survey comprising 13 questions. These questions covered usage parameters, satisfaction, training issues and reasons for avoidance of NiTi instruments. RESULTS: The response rate was 71%. Nickel-titanium rotary instruments were used routinely by 67% of those responding practitioners. Principle factors cited as being implicated in the decision to not adopt NiTi use included cost (65% of responses), lack of training and the perceived risk of instrument fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Over two thirds of dental practitioners in Wales use rotary NiTi endodontic technology with the majority having converted to such systems more than three years ago. There was, however, a significant disparity in NiTi usage between solely NHS practitioners (42%) and private practitioners (90%). Continued provision of high quality hands-on practical workshops may be of benefit in facilitating a positive initial NiTi experience in order to assist the transfer to these newer technologies.
OBJECTIVE: To assess adoption of endodontic nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary technology by general dental practitioners and identify factors influencing its uptake. DESIGN: Postal questionnaire. SETTING: General dental practitioners working in Wales. METHODS: General dental practitioners (n = 584) were approached regarding their usage or otherwise of nickel-titanium rotary instrumentation during root canal shaping. The postal questionnaire took the form of an anonymous survey comprising 13 questions. These questions covered usage parameters, satisfaction, training issues and reasons for avoidance of NiTi instruments. RESULTS: The response rate was 71%. Nickel-titanium rotary instruments were used routinely by 67% of those responding practitioners. Principle factors cited as being implicated in the decision to not adopt NiTi use included cost (65% of responses), lack of training and the perceived risk of instrument fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Over two thirds of dental practitioners in Wales use rotary NiTi endodontic technology with the majority having converted to such systems more than three years ago. There was, however, a significant disparity in NiTi usage between solely NHS practitioners (42%) and private practitioners (90%). Continued provision of high quality hands-on practical workshops may be of benefit in facilitating a positive initial NiTi experience in order to assist the transfer to these newer technologies.