V S Dawson1, H Fransson1,2, E Wolf1. 1. Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden. 2. Department of Endodontology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Abstract
AIM: To describe the decision-making process of the general dental practitioner (GDP) underlying the choice of coronal restoration of a root filled tooth. METHODOLOGY: GDPs were strategically selected with respect to gender, age, undergraduate dental school, service affiliation and duration of professional experience. Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted, focusing on the informant's personal experience of the process which leads to a decision as to how to restore a root filled tooth. The informants were invited to describe in their own words the latest two cases involving decisions of direct or full crown restorations respectively. The interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Interviews from 14 informants, aged 27-64 (mean age 46 years), were included and analysed according to Qualitative Content Analysis. RESULTS: A theme (latent content) was identified: Clinical factors were considered important but were overruled by context and patient opinions, if in conflict. Three main categories, including seven subcategories (manifest content), were identified. The categories were clinical factors, contextual factors and patient's views. Clinical factors underlying the GDPs' decision included the current dental status and the estimated longevity of the intended restoration. In certain cases, contextual factors were also of importance, either supporting the GDPs' decision or modifying it. However, the patient's views played a decisive role in the final choice of coronal restoration, leading to either mutual acceptance or a compromise, taking into account the patient's economic status and opinions. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to coronal restoration of a root filled tooth, the GDPs' decision-making process was based not only on clinical factors, but also on decisive contextual factors and consideration of the patients' views.
AIM: To describe the decision-making process of the general dental practitioner (GDP) underlying the choice of coronal restoration of a root filled tooth. METHODOLOGY:GDPs were strategically selected with respect to gender, age, undergraduate dental school, service affiliation and duration of professional experience. Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted, focusing on the informant's personal experience of the process which leads to a decision as to how to restore a root filled tooth. The informants were invited to describe in their own words the latest two cases involving decisions of direct or full crown restorations respectively. The interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Interviews from 14 informants, aged 27-64 (mean age 46 years), were included and analysed according to Qualitative Content Analysis. RESULTS: A theme (latent content) was identified: Clinical factors were considered important but were overruled by context and patient opinions, if in conflict. Three main categories, including seven subcategories (manifest content), were identified. The categories were clinical factors, contextual factors and patient's views. Clinical factors underlying the GDPs' decision included the current dental status and the estimated longevity of the intended restoration. In certain cases, contextual factors were also of importance, either supporting the GDPs' decision or modifying it. However, the patient's views played a decisive role in the final choice of coronal restoration, leading to either mutual acceptance or a compromise, taking into account the patient's economic status and opinions. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to coronal restoration of a root filled tooth, the GDPs' decision-making process was based not only on clinical factors, but also on decisive contextual factors and consideration of the patients' views.
Authors: M Zarow; A Ramírez-Sebastià; G Paolone; J de Ribot Porta; J Mora; J Espona; F Durán-Sindreu; M Roig Journal: Int Endod J Date: 2017-09-25 Impact factor: 5.264