The current attitudes and practices of dentists in Australia towards composite repair: A cross-sectional survey study.

Abstract

Background: Whether to replace or repair a composite restoration is controversial and varies among clinicians. This study was designed to collect information on the attitudes and practices of Australian dentists towards composite repair.

Methods: An electronic 16-item questionnaire was distributed online on Australian clinicians' dental forum with a URL address and instructions on completing the survey. The questionnaire remained accessible for 2 months. The data collected were analysed statistically using descriptive, average rank, Pearson chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests at α = 0.05.

Results: Repair of composite restorations was a widely accepted treatment modality among surveyed dentists. Despite this, approximately half of clinicians reported the prognosis of repaired restorations to be worse when compared to replacement. The most cited indications for repair were partial loss or fracture of the restoration, while the most common reason for repair was because this treatment modality was more conservative in terms of tooth structure removal. Most important patient factor influencing decision to repair composite restoration was caries risk of the patient (n = 50). Most significant situational factor to consider in decision whether to repair was previous (failed) attempts to repair (n = 74). The most important tooth level factor was the proximity of restoration to pulp (mean statistic rank 2.22). The most common composite surface treatment employed by participants bonding to old composite was acid etching (n = 87), and the main reason participants employed their chosen surface treatment was based on personal experience (n = 72).

Conclusion: The repair of composite restorations was a commonly performed procedure that is well accepted but may still be viewed as an inferior treatment to replacement by many Australian dentists. Most dentists agreed on indications for repair restorations and surface conditioning techniques, but there was wide variation in opinions overall. Due to the lack of high-quality evidence regarding composite repair techniques, dentists tend to rely on personal experience to guide their clinical decisions.