Repair or replacement of defective restorations by dentists in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network.
BACKGROUND
The authors aimed to determine whether dentists in practices belonging to The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) were more likely to repair or to replace a restoration that they diagnosed as defective; to quantify dentists' specific reasons for repairing or replacing restorations; and to test the hypothesis that certain dentist-, patient- and restoration-related variables are associated with the decision between repairing and replacing restorations.


METHODS
This cross-sectional study had a consecutive patient and restoration recruitment design. Practitioner-investigators (P-Is) recorded data for consecutively seen restorations in permanent teeth that needed repair or replacement. The DPBRN is a consortium of dental practitioners and dental organizations in the United States and Scandinavia. The collected data included the primary reason for repair or replacement, tooth surface or surfaces involved, restorative materials used and patients' demographic information.


RESULTS
P-Is collected data regarding 9,484 restorations from 7,502 patients in 197 practices. Seventy-five percent (7,073) of restorations were replaced and 25 percent (2,411) repaired. Secondary caries was the main reason (43 percent, n = 4,124) for treatment. Factors associated with a greater likelihood of repairing versus replacing restorations (P < .05) included having graduated from dental school more recently, practicing in a large group practice, being the dentist who placed the original restoration, patient's being of an older age, the original restorative material's being something other than amalgam, restoration of a molar and the original restoration's involving fewer tooth surfaces.


CONCLUSIONS
DPBRN dentists were more likely to replace than to repair restorations. Secondary caries was the most common reason for repairing or replacing restorations. Certain dentist-, patient- and restoration-related variables were associated with the repair-or-replace decision.


CONCLUSIONS
The selection of minimally invasive treatment for an existing restoration is critical, as it may affect the longevity of the tooth.
Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100415, Gainesville, FL 32610-0415, USA. vgordan@dental.ufl.edu
Valeria V
VV
Gordan
Joseph L
JL
Riley
Saulo
S
Geraldeli
D Brad
DB
Rindal
Vibeke
V
Qvist
Jeffrey L
JL
Fellows
H Paul
HP
Kellum
Gregg H
GH
Gilbert
D000367:Age Factors; D055812:Community-Based Participatory Research; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D003657:Decision Making; D003763:Dental Leakage; D018865:Dental Research / Q000379:methods*; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D058250:Dental Restoration Repair / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D019239:Practice Patterns, Dentists' / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011364:Professional Practice / Q000458:organization & administration; D019233:Retreatment; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires