Clinical Strategies for Managing Dental Caries in Egypt: Opinions of General Practitioner Dentists.
Loading...
Date
2015
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Background: To assess the approach of GPDs in Upper Egypt regarding preventive and
restorative treatments for various stages of carious lesion development.
Methods: A 42-item questionnaire was constructed for obtaining the GPD’s opinions. Factor
analyses (with Varimax rotation) were conducted to identify scales (clusters) of variables. Logistic
regression analyses, with continuing professional development as dependent variable, were
conducted to test for the effect of single and scaled factors regarding indications to perform
preventive or restorative treatments Results: All 70 participants returned the questionnaire. Three scale factors, i.e., treatment
strategies, were identified as: ‘operative-minded dentists’ (who make >10 amalgam and resin
composite restorations per week); ‘problem solvers’ (who have >10 years of experience, see >60
patients and make >10 temporary restorations per week); and ‘thinkers’ (who spend >50 hours /
year on continuing professional development but also make >10 restorations per week). Logistic
regression analyses found only one statistically significant relationship (p=0.03): ‘operative-minded
dentists’ indicated provision of significantly less caries-preventive measures. Most patient visits
were pain-induced.
Conclusion: It was concluded that most GPDs in Upper Egypt have an operative-minded treatment
philosophy, and spend less time on preventive measures. Amalgam is the most common
restorative material used.
Description
Keywords
Dental caries, caries control, caries management, Egypt, restorative dentistry, preventive dentistry, practice based research, public oral health
Citation
Farag Abeer, Sanden Wil J M van der, Mulder Jan, Creugers Nico H J, Frencken Jo E. Clinical Strategies for Managing Dental Caries in Egypt: Opinions of General Practitioner Dentists. British Journal of Medicine and Medical Research. 2015; 5(7): 924-932.