Clinical Decision‐Making of Repair vs. Replacement of Defective Direct Dental Restorations: A Multinational Cross‐Sectional Study With Meta‐Analysis

Ömer Hatipoğlu,João Filipe Brochado Martins,Mohmed Isaqali Karobari,Nessrin Taha,Thiyezen Abdullah Aldhelai,Daoud M. Ayyad,Ahmed A. Madfa,Benjamin Martin‐Biedma,Rafael Fernández‐Grisales,Bakhyt A. Omarova,Wen Yi Lim,Suha Alfirjani,Kacper Nijakowski,Surendar Sugumaran,Xenos Petridis,Silvana Jukić Krmek,Dian Agustin Wahjuningrum,Azhar Iqbal,Imran Zainal Abidin,Martha Gallegos Intriago,Yasmine Elhamouly,Paulo Jorge Palma,Fatma Pertek Hatipoğlu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13321

2024-11-04

Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

Abstract:Objectives This web‐based survey, conducted across multiple countries, sought to explore the factors that impact the decision‐making of clinicians when it comes to managing defective direct restorations. Methods A survey consisting of 14 questions was sent out to dentists in 21 countries through various online platforms. The survey consisted of two sections. The first contained five questions about demographic information, while the second involved eight clinical scenarios. In the second part, participants were tasked with deciding whether to repair or replace defective composite and amalgam restorations. Results Three thousand six hundred eighty dental practitioners completed the survey. For composite restorations, repair was preferred in scenarios like partial loss or fracture (RR:0.72; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.89; p = 0.002), whereas replacement was favored for secondary caries (RR:2.43; 95% CI: 1.87, 3.16; p

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine