title: Why, when, and how general practitioners restore endodontically treated teeth: a representative survey in Germany.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this study was to assess current opinions, applied techniques, and materials for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) in a nationwide survey in Germany.
  
  
  METHODS
  Completed questionnaires from 1,648 dentists were returned (response rate 63%).
  
  
  RESULTS
  In general, posts were reported to be used more frequently (51%) for indirect restorations than for direct restorations (21%). Dentists restored anterior teeth (65%) more frequently with direct restorations than posterior teeth (48%). Compared to an earlier survey, fewer dentists stated that posttreatment stabilizes the remaining tooth structure. The ferrule effect as a key success factor was held by the vast majority of dentists (88%). A trend towards adhesive techniques both for post placement and core build-up was observed. Composite resins (49%) were reported to be used twice as much as zinc phosphate cement (24%) for the luting of posts; composite resins were the core build-up material of choice (75%). Amalgam was rarely used (0.2%). Irrespective of the final restoration, fiber posts were the most popular post material (46% for telescopic crowns vs. 69% for single crowns).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Adhesive composite core build-ups with and without fiber posts were the predominant treatment approach to restore ETT in Germany. There was widespread agreement with the ferrule effect as a key restorative success factor for indirect restorations.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Today, it is general accepted that ferrule preparation is key. Glass-fiber posts appear to be most popular. Still different systems are used depending on type of final restoration, while the reasons to do so remain unclear.
authors.affiliation: Clinic for Prosthetic Dentistry, Department of Dentistry, University Clinic Ulm, Ulm, Germany. naumann@naumann-kiessling.de.|Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center of Dentistry, University of Ulm, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, 89081, Ulm, Germany. naumann@naumann-kiessling.de.
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Naumann
authors.affiliation: Department of Preventive, Restorative and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
authors.forename: Klaus W
authors.initials: KW
authors.lastname: Neuhaus
authors.affiliation: Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Charité University Clinic CC03 Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
authors.forename: Manja
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Kölpin
authors.affiliation: Department of Preventive, Restorative and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.|DENTSPLY DETREY, Konstanz, Germany.
authors.forename: Rainer
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Seemann
mesh_terms: D003188:Composite Resins; D003442:Crowns; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D005792:General Practice, Dental; D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D011176:Post and Core Technique; D019239:Practice Patterns, Dentists' / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D012390:Root Canal Therapy; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D019553:Tooth, Nonvital / Q000628:therapy*
chemical_list: D003188:Composite Resins
keywords: Dowel; Post-and-core technique; Reconstruction; Root; Root-treated teeth