CONTEMPORARY DENTAL CARIES MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS IN PAEDIATRIC DENTISTRY: A SURVEY OF AWARENESS AND PRACTICE OF A GROUP OF GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL DENTISTS
Original Articles
Figure 3. First choice of management of 74( see radiograph inset) according to specialty. * denotes statistical significance( p > 0.05). SSC: Stainless Steel Crown; GIC: Glass Ionomer Cement.
( n = 12, 38.7 %). Significantly so, 21.8 % of GDPs( n = 26) would choose GIC while all none of the PDs( n = 0) chose GIC. In addition, a small proportion of GDPs( n = 11, 7.4 %) and PDs( n = 2, 6.5 %) chose amalgam, whilst none of the GDPs( n = 0) and 0.7 % of PDs( n = 1) suggested zirconia crowns as a final restoration. 3.2. Results for the second question( PM), the medicament of choice in a pulpotomy( Fig 4); overall, those surveyed chose the following: Ferric Sulphate( FS)( n = 61, 40.7 %), followed by Formocresol( FC)( n = 55, 36.7 %), Mineral Trioxide Aggregate( MTA)( n = 21, 14 %) then Calcium Hydroxide( CH)( n = 13, 8.7 %). Cross tabulating the PM choice and specialty( Fig 5) revealed no statistically significant difference between PM choices of PDs and GDPs( p = 0.281). The majority of GDPs chose FS( n = 48, 40.3 %), followed by FC( n = 42, 35.3 %), MTA( n = 16, 13.4 %) and finally CH( n = 13, 10.9 %). While 41.9 % of PDs( n = 13) chose FS and an equal proportion chose FC too, followed by MTA( n = 5, 16.1 %). No PD chose CH as a PM medicament( n = 0, 0 %). 3.3. Results for the third and fourth questions( HT), t awareness and practice of the Hall Technique. The majority of those surveyed( n = 91, 60.6 %) had heard about the HT while those who had not heard about it were 39.4 %( n = 59). However an overall majority( n = 122, 81.4 %) had not used the HT clinically, compared to 18.6 %( n = 28) who had( Fig. 6). Cross tabulating awareness and practice of the HT with specialty revealed different results between GDPs and PDs( Fig. 7), which were statistically significant for both categories( both p values = 0.003). In both the GDP and PD groups, the majority had heard about the HT( 54.6 % and 83.8 % respectively) and the majority had not practiced the HT( 86.5 % and 61 % respectively). The proportion of PDs whom had heard about the HT( n = 26, 83.8 %) was statistically significantly higher( p = 0.003) than GDPs whom had heard of the HT( n = 65, 54.6 % of GDPs). There was a larger proportion of GDPs( n = 103, 86.5 %) who had not used the HT compared to PDs( n = 19, 61.2 %). Moreover, the proportion of PDs whom had practiced the HT( n = 12, 38.8 %) was statistically significantly higher( p = 0.003) than GDPs whom had practiced the HT( n = 16, 13.5 %). 3.4. Results for questions 5 and 6 related to sealing dental caries( SDC) in primary and permanent teeth. The majority of those surveyed did not believe that sealing in caries in primary and permanent teeth was a viable option( Fig. 8). When asked if sealing in, rather than removing, caries in primary teeth was a viable option the majority disagreed( n = 85, 56.6 %) while 43.7 % agreed( n = 65). Moreover, when asked if sealing in a carious noncavitated enamel lesion in permanent teeth was a viable option, the majority of those surveyed disagreed( n = 80, 53.3 %) as opposed to those who agreed( n = 70, 46.6 %). When cross tabulating the specialty and the concept of SDC in primary and permanent teeth, no statistically significant differences( p = 0.517, p = 0.182 for both dentitions respectively) between GDPs and PDs were found( Fig. 9). GDPs opinions regarding SDC in primary teeth were divided; against( n = 71, 59.6 %) and
30 Stoma Edu J. 2017; 4( 1): 27-38. http:// www. stomaeduj. com