Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.
Buy
FullText & PDF
Unlimited re-access via MyKarger
Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more
CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *
Select
KAB
Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!
If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.
Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.
Learn more
Access via DeepDyve
Unlimited fulltext viewing Of this article
Organize, annotate And mark up articles
Printing And downloading restrictions apply
Select
Subscribe
Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years
Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more
Subcription rates
Select
* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.
Article / Publication Details
Abstract
We aimed to investigate changes in management preferences for deep carious lesions and pulps exposed during carious tissue removal that occurred during the last 10 years and identify associated dentists’ background factors. The data was collected among dentists registered with the Lithuanian Dental Chamber at two time points using a similar questionnaire. In 2011, 400 randomly selected dentists received a questionnaire by mail, and 153 (38.3%) responded. In 2021, an electronic invitation to an online questionnaire was sent to all members of the Lithuanian Dental Chamber, and 213 (8.9%) dentists responded. The questionnaire included the definitions of management options, a radiograph and a clinical picture of a deep carious lesion reaching to the inner fourth of dentine in a mature permanent tooth, asked management preferences in four different scenarios, as well as participants’ background characteristics, reasons for management, and procedural preferences. Data was analyzed using bivariate and multivariable analyses. Compared to 2011, participants in 2021 had 60% lower odds of preferring nonselective versus selective caries removal (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7) and endodontic treatment versus nonselective and selective caries removal (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.6) in the scenario of asymptomatic and symptomatic (indicating reversible pulpitis at most) deep lesions, respectively. For exposed pulp, participants in 2021 had lower odds than in 2011 of preferring endodontic treatment versus vital pulp therapy (direct pulp capping and pulpotomies) for both scenarios without symptoms (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7) and with symptoms (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.4). A higher proportion of respondents in 2021 reported using rubber dam (44% versus 17% in 2011, p
S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
留言 (0)