Orifice barrier preferences for coronal restoration of root filled teeth by endodontists and other dental practitioners in Australia: A questionnaire survey
To compare the use of orifice barriers (OB) in root-filled teeth (RFT) between specialist endodontic practitioners (SEP) and general and other specialist practitioners (GDP+), and identify common materials, reasons for selection, and techniques. An online survey was distributed to SEP and GDP+ pract...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of dentistry 2025-02, Vol.153, p.105497, Article 105497 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 105497 |
| container_title | Journal of dentistry |
| container_volume | 153 |
| creator | Wylie, Michael E. Parashos, Peter Fernando, James R. Palamara, Joseph E.A. Sloan, Alastair J. |
| description | To compare the use of orifice barriers (OB) in root-filled teeth (RFT) between specialist endodontic practitioners (SEP) and general and other specialist practitioners (GDP+), and identify common materials, reasons for selection, and techniques.
An online survey was distributed to SEP and GDP+ practising in Australia. Demographic and multiple-choice questions relating to material selection and technique choices were asked to evaluate and relate usage patterns to practising and training backgrounds. Fisher's exact tests were undertaken to compare categorical variables across practitioner groups. Significance level was set at p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105497 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_39645181</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0300571224006675</els_id><sourcerecordid>3146569704</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1541-a485098d5f43b02cdf004a01582216d7812a29086820c60c76d4c899dd3286f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9q3DAQxkVoSTZpniBQdOzFW0mWZbnQwxL6DwK55NCb0EpjosUrbUdyYN8lDxs5m_bYk2D0zffNzI-QG87WnHH1ebfeeYhlLZiQtdLJoT8jK677oeG9-v2OrFjLWNP1XFyQy5x3jDHJxHBOLtpByY5rviLP9xjG4IBuLWIApAeEERCig0zHhNQlTNFOFCGXhLaEFGkaKaZU6BimCTwtAOWRbo8Uok8-xRJyydRGT1N5rJbLlNXhgNaVsBgAZhoi3cy5oJ2C_UI39M9cA-pftAGB5hmf4PiBvB_tlOH67b0iD9-_Pdz-bO7uf_y63dw1jneSN1bqjg3ad6Nst0w4P9ZFLeOdFoIr32surBiYVlowp5jrlZdOD4P3rdBqbK_Ip5PtAdPrGGYfsoNpshHSnE3LperU0DNZpe1J6jDlXE9lDhj2Fo-GM7NQMTvzSsUsVMyJSu36-BYwb_fg__X8xVAFX08CqFs-VQwmu7Aw8PUYrhifwn8DXgA8UaG2</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3146569704</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Orifice barrier preferences for coronal restoration of root filled teeth by endodontists and other dental practitioners in Australia: A questionnaire survey</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Wylie, Michael E. ; Parashos, Peter ; Fernando, James R. ; Palamara, Joseph E.A. ; Sloan, Alastair J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Wylie, Michael E. ; Parashos, Peter ; Fernando, James R. ; Palamara, Joseph E.A. ; Sloan, Alastair J.</creatorcontrib><description>To compare the use of orifice barriers (OB) in root-filled teeth (RFT) between specialist endodontic practitioners (SEP) and general and other specialist practitioners (GDP+), and identify common materials, reasons for selection, and techniques.
An online survey was distributed to SEP and GDP+ practising in Australia. Demographic and multiple-choice questions relating to material selection and technique choices were asked to evaluate and relate usage patterns to practising and training backgrounds. Fisher's exact tests were undertaken to compare categorical variables across practitioner groups. Significance level was set at p<.05.
There were 457 eligible responses: 393(86%) GDP+ and 64(14%) SEP. Of 429 reporting endodontically treating or restoring teeth, 317(73.9%) placed OB; preferred depth of root filling removal by most (91.8%) was ≤ 2 mm, with more SEP preferring 2 mm than GDP+(p=.02). Preferred materials for OB were conventional and resin-modified GIC (GIC), resin composite materials (RC), Cavit™ and zinc polycarboxylate cement (ZPC). ‘Ease of use’ was a common reason among all practitioners for GIC and RC. Significantly more SEP(p<.001) chose ZPC in all teeth and more commonly because of ‘Ease of use’ for both posterior (p<.001) and anterior (p=.002) teeth. All ZPC-using SEP preferred using a paste-filler/lentulo spiral, significantly more than GDP+ for posterior (p<.001) and anterior (p=.002) teeth. Cavit™ was often chosen for ‘Sealing ability’.
OB were widely placed by dental practitioners in Australia, with a small group of materials selected, most commonly for ease of use or sealing ability. The findings of this study suggest that further research should be undertaken to investigate the relative performance of these materials as OB and to inform the clinician's choices when restoring RFT.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0300-5712</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1879-176X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-176X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105497</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39645181</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Coronal Restoration ; Dental materials ; Endodontics ; Orifice barriers ; Questionnaire survey ; Root filled teeth</subject><ispartof>Journal of dentistry, 2025-02, Vol.153, p.105497, Article 105497</ispartof><rights>2024 The Author(s)</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1541-a485098d5f43b02cdf004a01582216d7812a29086820c60c76d4c899dd3286f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5788-1676 ; 0000-0002-1791-0903 ; 0000-0003-2708-8834</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105497$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39645181$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wylie, Michael E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parashos, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernando, James R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palamara, Joseph E.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sloan, Alastair J.</creatorcontrib><title>Orifice barrier preferences for coronal restoration of root filled teeth by endodontists and other dental practitioners in Australia: A questionnaire survey</title><title>Journal of dentistry</title><addtitle>J Dent</addtitle><description>To compare the use of orifice barriers (OB) in root-filled teeth (RFT) between specialist endodontic practitioners (SEP) and general and other specialist practitioners (GDP+), and identify common materials, reasons for selection, and techniques.
An online survey was distributed to SEP and GDP+ practising in Australia. Demographic and multiple-choice questions relating to material selection and technique choices were asked to evaluate and relate usage patterns to practising and training backgrounds. Fisher's exact tests were undertaken to compare categorical variables across practitioner groups. Significance level was set at p<.05.
There were 457 eligible responses: 393(86%) GDP+ and 64(14%) SEP. Of 429 reporting endodontically treating or restoring teeth, 317(73.9%) placed OB; preferred depth of root filling removal by most (91.8%) was ≤ 2 mm, with more SEP preferring 2 mm than GDP+(p=.02). Preferred materials for OB were conventional and resin-modified GIC (GIC), resin composite materials (RC), Cavit™ and zinc polycarboxylate cement (ZPC). ‘Ease of use’ was a common reason among all practitioners for GIC and RC. Significantly more SEP(p<.001) chose ZPC in all teeth and more commonly because of ‘Ease of use’ for both posterior (p<.001) and anterior (p=.002) teeth. All ZPC-using SEP preferred using a paste-filler/lentulo spiral, significantly more than GDP+ for posterior (p<.001) and anterior (p=.002) teeth. Cavit™ was often chosen for ‘Sealing ability’.
OB were widely placed by dental practitioners in Australia, with a small group of materials selected, most commonly for ease of use or sealing ability. The findings of this study suggest that further research should be undertaken to investigate the relative performance of these materials as OB and to inform the clinician's choices when restoring RFT.</description><subject>Coronal Restoration</subject><subject>Dental materials</subject><subject>Endodontics</subject><subject>Orifice barriers</subject><subject>Questionnaire survey</subject><subject>Root filled teeth</subject><issn>0300-5712</issn><issn>1879-176X</issn><issn>1879-176X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2025</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc9q3DAQxkVoSTZpniBQdOzFW0mWZbnQwxL6DwK55NCb0EpjosUrbUdyYN8lDxs5m_bYk2D0zffNzI-QG87WnHH1ebfeeYhlLZiQtdLJoT8jK677oeG9-v2OrFjLWNP1XFyQy5x3jDHJxHBOLtpByY5rviLP9xjG4IBuLWIApAeEERCig0zHhNQlTNFOFCGXhLaEFGkaKaZU6BimCTwtAOWRbo8Uok8-xRJyydRGT1N5rJbLlNXhgNaVsBgAZhoi3cy5oJ2C_UI39M9cA-pftAGB5hmf4PiBvB_tlOH67b0iD9-_Pdz-bO7uf_y63dw1jneSN1bqjg3ad6Nst0w4P9ZFLeOdFoIr32surBiYVlowp5jrlZdOD4P3rdBqbK_Ip5PtAdPrGGYfsoNpshHSnE3LperU0DNZpe1J6jDlXE9lDhj2Fo-GM7NQMTvzSsUsVMyJSu36-BYwb_fg__X8xVAFX08CqFs-VQwmu7Aw8PUYrhifwn8DXgA8UaG2</recordid><startdate>202502</startdate><enddate>202502</enddate><creator>Wylie, Michael E.</creator><creator>Parashos, Peter</creator><creator>Fernando, James R.</creator><creator>Palamara, Joseph E.A.</creator><creator>Sloan, Alastair J.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5788-1676</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1791-0903</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2708-8834</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202502</creationdate><title>Orifice barrier preferences for coronal restoration of root filled teeth by endodontists and other dental practitioners in Australia: A questionnaire survey</title><author>Wylie, Michael E. ; Parashos, Peter ; Fernando, James R. ; Palamara, Joseph E.A. ; Sloan, Alastair J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1541-a485098d5f43b02cdf004a01582216d7812a29086820c60c76d4c899dd3286f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2025</creationdate><topic>Coronal Restoration</topic><topic>Dental materials</topic><topic>Endodontics</topic><topic>Orifice barriers</topic><topic>Questionnaire survey</topic><topic>Root filled teeth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wylie, Michael E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parashos, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernando, James R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palamara, Joseph E.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sloan, Alastair J.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of dentistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wylie, Michael E.</au><au>Parashos, Peter</au><au>Fernando, James R.</au><au>Palamara, Joseph E.A.</au><au>Sloan, Alastair J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Orifice barrier preferences for coronal restoration of root filled teeth by endodontists and other dental practitioners in Australia: A questionnaire survey</atitle><jtitle>Journal of dentistry</jtitle><addtitle>J Dent</addtitle><date>2025-02</date><risdate>2025</risdate><volume>153</volume><spage>105497</spage><pages>105497-</pages><artnum>105497</artnum><issn>0300-5712</issn><issn>1879-176X</issn><eissn>1879-176X</eissn><abstract>To compare the use of orifice barriers (OB) in root-filled teeth (RFT) between specialist endodontic practitioners (SEP) and general and other specialist practitioners (GDP+), and identify common materials, reasons for selection, and techniques.
An online survey was distributed to SEP and GDP+ practising in Australia. Demographic and multiple-choice questions relating to material selection and technique choices were asked to evaluate and relate usage patterns to practising and training backgrounds. Fisher's exact tests were undertaken to compare categorical variables across practitioner groups. Significance level was set at p<.05.
There were 457 eligible responses: 393(86%) GDP+ and 64(14%) SEP. Of 429 reporting endodontically treating or restoring teeth, 317(73.9%) placed OB; preferred depth of root filling removal by most (91.8%) was ≤ 2 mm, with more SEP preferring 2 mm than GDP+(p=.02). Preferred materials for OB were conventional and resin-modified GIC (GIC), resin composite materials (RC), Cavit™ and zinc polycarboxylate cement (ZPC). ‘Ease of use’ was a common reason among all practitioners for GIC and RC. Significantly more SEP(p<.001) chose ZPC in all teeth and more commonly because of ‘Ease of use’ for both posterior (p<.001) and anterior (p=.002) teeth. All ZPC-using SEP preferred using a paste-filler/lentulo spiral, significantly more than GDP+ for posterior (p<.001) and anterior (p=.002) teeth. Cavit™ was often chosen for ‘Sealing ability’.
OB were widely placed by dental practitioners in Australia, with a small group of materials selected, most commonly for ease of use or sealing ability. The findings of this study suggest that further research should be undertaken to investigate the relative performance of these materials as OB and to inform the clinician's choices when restoring RFT.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>39645181</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105497</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5788-1676</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1791-0903</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2708-8834</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0300-5712 |
| ispartof | Journal of dentistry, 2025-02, Vol.153, p.105497, Article 105497 |
| issn | 0300-5712 1879-176X 1879-176X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmed_primary_39645181 |
| source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Coronal Restoration Dental materials Endodontics Orifice barriers Questionnaire survey Root filled teeth |
| title | Orifice barrier preferences for coronal restoration of root filled teeth by endodontists and other dental practitioners in Australia: A questionnaire survey |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T05%3A36%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Orifice%20barrier%20preferences%20for%20coronal%20restoration%20of%20root%20filled%20teeth%20by%20endodontists%20and%20other%20dental%20practitioners%20in%20Australia:%20A%20questionnaire%20survey&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20dentistry&rft.au=Wylie,%20Michael%20E.&rft.date=2025-02&rft.volume=153&rft.spage=105497&rft.pages=105497-&rft.artnum=105497&rft.issn=0300-5712&rft.eissn=1879-176X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105497&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3146569704%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3146569704&rft_id=info:pmid/39645181&rft_els_id=S0300571224006675&rfr_iscdi=true |