DefinePK

Abstract

AbstractObjective: To evaluate the personal preference of dentists regarding the choice of restorative material for posterior permanent teeth in adults.
Methodology: This descriptive cross-sectional study used a questionnaire developed by the authors. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were performed, and a p<0.05 was taken as significant.
Results: Out of 200 participants, 84 (41.9%) preferred restorative material, followed by amalgam (n=73, 36.5%), glass-ionomer cement (n=29, 14.6%) and resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) (n=14, 7%). No statistically significant difference was found between the choice of restorative material and the years of experience or practice (p=0.317). The most preferred technique for dental composite restoration was incremental (n=76, 38%). In individuals with class 5 cavities, dental composite was the most preferred restorative material (n=75, 37.5%). The primary motive for choosing composite was esthetics and strength; for amalgam, the primary motive was strength and durability.
Conclusion: Composite resin was the most preferred choice of material for restoring cavities in posterior dentition. Amalgam, besides having disadvantages like poor esthetics and staining, was second most preferred. There's a need for awareness and up-to-date knowledge regarding the choice of newer restorative material.Key words: ADA, amalgam, caries, cention-N, composite, GIC, hybrid, restorative, RMGIC.