Current and future trends in the teaching of direct posterior resin composites in Malaysian dental schools: a cross-sectional study

Longevity of composite restorations in posterior teeth placed by dental students: a 12-year retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the longevity of resin composite restorations placed in posterior teeth by dental students, using data from electronic records from 2008 to 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Demographic (gender and age) and clinical variables (dental group, position in dental arch, and the number of restored surfaces) were evaluated. The 5-year follow-up was assessed according to the day the restoration was placed. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to calculate the annual failure rate. Data were analyzed by Chi-Square, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney tests (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

In total, 3.883 records relative to return periodicity were analyzed. The final sample consisted of 900 restorations from 479 patients. The majority were females, aged between 31 and 60. In total, 256 failures were reported (success rate = 78%), showing an annual failure rate of 2.05%. The main reasons for failures were restoration replacement (55.5%), endodontics (21.9%), prosthetics (14.5%) and extraction (8.2%). There was a higher risk of failure in restorations involving three or more surfaces (p = 0.000) and in patients over 60 years (p < 0.001). In females (p = 0.030), molars (p = 0.044), and maxillary teeth (p = 0.038) failed in a shorter time.

CONCLUSIONS

Resin composite restorations placed in permanent posterior teeth by dental students had high survival rates. The main reason for failure was the replacement of restorations. The age group and the number of restored surfaces significantly affected the success of the restorations.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The electronic health records over 12 years showed that 78% of the resin restorations in posterior teeth placed by dental students were successful for a minimum of five years.

Current trends in placing posterior composite restorations: Perspectives from Palestinian general dentists: A questionnair study

Aim

The success of composite restorations relies on material selection and practitioner-related factors that shape the overall outcome. This study explores the practices of Palestinian general dental practitioners in placing posterior composites, examining the impact of work sector, experience, and gender on their choices.

Materials and Methods

The study was conducted as an online cross-sectional questionnaire and involved 351 participants, with a response rate of 69.8%. The survey comprised 18 closed-ended questions covering demographics, material selection, and composite placement in special cases, techniques, and factors influencing the choices. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and Fisher's exact tests.

Results

Composite was the predominant choice for small-size (83.7%) and large-size posterior cavities (60.4%). Practitioners commonly opted for composite restorations in cases involving occlusal parafunctional activity (60%), poor oral hygiene (78%), and subgingival cavities (72.2%). Only 19.6% and 5.3% reported occlusal and gingival beveling, respectively. Rubber dams for isolation stood at 30%, one-step self-etch adhesives at 44.9%, and the oblique layering technique at 51%. Light-emitting diode curing units were popular (97.55%), but monitoring output with a radiometer was infrequent (93.5%). Tofflemire metal matrix usage was 46.1%, whereas a sectional matrix system was employed by 29.8%. A 2 mm layer exposure to light curing for 20 s was reported by 62%, and 27.75% utilized additional light-curing postmatrix band removal.

Conclusion

The study highlights the need for Palestinian dental professionals to update their clinical approaches in placing composite restorations in posterior teeth. Gender, work sector, and experience influence practitioners' choices, emphasizing the importance of tailored continuing education programs for improving clinical practices.

Mechanical Performance of Extensive Restorations Made with Short Fiber-Reinforced Composites without Coverage: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies

In recent years, composite resin materials have been the most frequently used materials for direct restorations of posterior teeth. These materials have some clinically relevant limitations due to their lack of fracture toughness, especially when used in larger cavities with high volume factors or when utilized as direct or indirect overlays or crown restorations. Recently, short-fiber-reinforced composite materials have been used in bi-structure restorations as a dentine substituting material due to their superior mechanical properties; however, there is no scientific consensus as to whether they can be used as full restorations. The aim of our review was to examine the available literature and gather scientific evidence on this matter. Two independent authors performed a thorough literature search using PubMed and ScienceDirect up until December 2023. This study followed the PRISMA guidelines, and the risk of bias was assessed using the QUIN tool. The authors selected in vitro studies that used short-fiber-reinforced composite materials as complete restorations, with a conventional composite material as a comparison group. Out of 2079 potentially relevant articles, 16 met our inclusion criteria. All of the included studies reported that the usage of short-fiber-reinforced composites improved the restoration's load-bearing capacity. Fifteen of the included publications examined the fracture pattern, and thirteen of them reported a more favorable fracture outcome for the short-fiber-reinforced group. Only one article reported a more favorable fracture pattern for the control group; however, the difference between groups was not significant. Within the limitations of this review, the evidence suggests that short-fiber-reinforced composites can be used effectively as complete restorations to reinforce structurally compromised teeth.

Class II composite restoration technique teaching: A randomised controlled crossover laboratory-based trial involving a novel ringless sectional matrix technique

INTRODUCTION

Objectives were to assess how different techniques (including a novel ringless sectional matrix approach) affect students' restorative outcomes, and their preferences for and preparedness to clinically implement new techniques with the aim of introducing appropriate techniques to the undergraduate curriculum.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Students performed two class II composite restorations in plastic teeth using two sectional matrix techniques (separating ring vs. without [ringless]), and two composite restorative techniques (incremental vs. injection-moulded bulk-fill). Restorations were assessed on multiple parameters which were combined to rate them as "good" or not. Online surveys assessed students' preferences for and preparedness to clinically implement new techniques.

RESULTS

Contact area concavity (OR = 106, p < .001) and cervical marginal overhang (OR = 7.4, p < .001) were much more likely with the separating ring compared to the ringless sectional matrix technique. "Good" restorations were 29.5 times more likely when using ringless compared to separating ring techniques and 3.3 times more likely when using the injection-moulding bulk-fill compared to layered composite technique. A majority of students preferred the ringless to separating ring sectional matrix technique and the injection-moulding bulk-fill to layered composite technique. Large majorities felt prepared to implement the new techniques clinically with no or minimal guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

A classic sectional matrix technique with separating ring resulted in a much greater occurrence of contact area concavity and cervical marginal overhang than a novel ringless approach. When allied with student preferences and clinical preparedness, inclusion of the novel ringless approach in the undergraduate curriculum can be supported alongside bulk-fill injection-moulding techniques.

Teaching of posterior composites for the restoration of permanent teeth in undergraduate dental training programmes: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess aspects of teaching of posterior composite restorations (PCRs) in permanent teeth in dental schools.

STUDY SELECTION

Quantitative studies reporting on dental schools' teaching regarding the placement of PCRs in permanent teeth. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed. Risk of bias was assessed based on the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).

SOURCES

Electronic databases (MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via Ovid, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched in January 2023.

DATA

Forty sources reporting on 34 studies having surveyed 1,286 dental schools were included. Overall, 92.7% (95%-CI: 88.2-95.5) of dental schools reported to teach PCRs. PCRs in three-surface Class II cavities are taught by 82.0% (95%-CI: 70.4-89.7). The mandatory use of liners in deep cavities is taught by 78.3% (95%-CI: 68.9-85.5), and 44.0% (95%-CI: 34.3-54.2) reported to teach bulk-fill composites. While most posterior restorations placed by students were composites (56.1%; 95%-CI: 46.0-65.8), 94.7% (95%-CI: 86.6-98.0) of dental schools (still) teach posterior amalgam restorations. The proportion of dental schools teaching PCRs in three-surface Class II cavities increased and the mean proportion of PCRs among all posterior restorations increased over time (padj.≤0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The teaching of PCRs in dental schools around the world reflects the increased use of resin composite in clinical practice, with students in countries where dental amalgam continues to be used, placing more posterior composites than restorations of dental amalgam. The teaching of PCRs, which is anticipated to increase, will continue to be refined with further developments in adhesive materials, devices, instrumentation, and techniques.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Graduating dentists can be expected to be familiar with the use of resin composites for the restoration of posterior teeth.

Clinical Evaluation of Reasons for Immediate Composite Restoration Failure Placed by Dental Students: A Cross-sectional Study in Jordan

Objective:

The present study aims to investigate the reasons for the immediate failure of direct anterior and posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students.

Methods:

A cross-sectional study on resin composite restorations placed by fourth- and fifth-year dental students (n=436). Variables included in the study were; the operative field isolation method, the time needed to complete the restoration after cavity preparation to polishing and finishing, and the plaque index of the patient. Restoration class distribution according to the type of tooth and cavity classification was examined and recorded. Restorations were clinically evaluated immediately after placement. It involved the assessment of the restoration’s mobility, marginal discoloration, and lack of anatomy.

Results:

A total of 233 direct anterior and posterior resin composite restorations which were placed by 127 students were diagnosed as failed restorations. The mode of failure was distributed as mobility/debonding (61.80%), marginal discoloration (29.18%), and lack of anatomy (9.02%). Cl III restorations demonstrated the highest failure on tooth type and cavity classification (30%), followed by Cl II restorations in molars (18.45%). Failure-associated factors were proper restoration manipulation, field isolation, and patients’ plaque index.

Conclusion:

In the current study, the most frequent reason for the immediate failure of resin composite restorations was the quick application of the restoration either as the only associated factor or coupled with other failure-associated factors. Failure to maintain proper field isolation and the poor oral hygiene of the patient were the other two failure-associated factors.

A Contemporary Evaluation on Posterior Direct Restoration Teaching among Undergraduates in Dental Schools in Malaysia

There is a current trend to restore posterior teeth with composite resin due to increasing demands on natural tooth colour restoration and increased concern about the safety of amalgam restorations. The objective was to evaluate the current teaching of posterior direct restoration among restorative dental lecturers in Malaysia compared to available international literature. An online questionnaire, which sought information on the teaching of posterior restoration was developed and distributed to 13 dental schools in Malaysia. The response rate for the questionnaire was 53.8%. The most popular posterior restoration teaching methods among the respondents were lecture (95.7%), demonstration (87.0%) and problem-based learning (PBL) (73.9%), while continuous assessment and a practical competency test (82.6%) were the most popular assessment methods. Placing a hard setting calcium hydroxide and GIC base for deep cavity restored by composite restoration was taught in 79.2% of cases. The standard protocols for posterior composite restoration were incremental filling in deep cavity (87.5%), using circumferential metal bands with wooden wedge (91.7%), with a total etch system (95.8%), using a light emitting diode (LED) light curing unit (91.7%), finishing using water cooling (80%) and finishing with a disc (87.5%). Graduates from dental schools in Malaysia received similar theoretical, preclinical and clinical teaching on posterior restoration techniques, although there were variations in the delivery methods, techniques and assessments, pointing to a need for uniformity and consensus.