Tooth-coloured restorative materials are being used increasingly more often in Class II preparations in permanent teeth. Using a practice-based study design, we aimed to assess the survival time of Class II restorations and to identify factors relevant to their longevity. Class II restorations (n = 4,030), consisting of resin composites (81.5%), compomers (12.7%), amalgams (4.6%), and glass-ionomer cement restorations (1.2%), were placed in 1,873 patients with a median age of 15 yr. In total, 92.7% of restorations were placed due to primary caries and 5.8% were replacements. After an average follow-up period of 4.6 yr, 61.6% of the restorations were successful, 11.2% had failed, and 27.2% were not available for evaluation (owing to patient drop-out). The mean annual failure rate was 2.9% for resin-composite restorations and 1.6% for amalgams. For resin-composite restorations, secondary caries was the most common reason for replacement (73.9%), followed by loss (8.0%), fracture (5.3%), and marginal defects (2.4%). Multilevel Cox-regression analyses identified young age of the patient, high previous caries experience, deep cavities, and saucer-shaped preparation technique as predisposing to shorter longevity of resin-composite restorations. One brand of resin composite had a shorter survival time than the others.

The aim was to measure variations in threshold for operative treatment of approximal caries in permanent teeth and the use of restorative materials, compared with results from studies conducted in Norway in 1983 and 1995. In 2009, a precoded questionnaire was sent electronically to 3,654 dentists with E-mail addresses in the member register of the Norwegian Dental Association. The questions were related to caries, treatment strategies and choice of dental materials. Replies were obtained from 61% of the dentists after two reminders. Restorative treatment of approximal lesions confined to enamel, based on radiographic appearance, was proposed by 7% of the dentists, compared with 66% in 1983 and 18% in 1995. Younger dentists, significantly more often than older, would defer operative treatment of approximal lesions until the lesion was visible in dentine. While tunnel preparation most often was the preparation of choice in 1995 (47%), saucer-shaped preparation was most favoured in 2009 (69%). Tunnel preparation was only preferred by 4% of the dentists. Resin composite was the restorative material preferred by 95%, compared with 16% in 1995. The corresponding values for conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) were 1 versus 22%, for resin-modified GIC 1 versus 7%, and for a combination of GIC and resin composite 2 versus 22%. Compomer was preferred by 1% of the respondents. The authors conclude that treatment concepts for approximal caries have changed considerably during the last 26 years. In 2009, only 7% of dentists reported that they would treat approximal caries operatively before the lesion reached dentine.

This study aimed to investigate dentists' general experience, knowledge about diagnosis, and treatment of dental erosive wear in young adults. A questionnaire was sent to 1262 Norwegian public dental health-employed dentists. The response rate was 60%. Results indicated that most dentists recorded erosive wear, half of them used a specific scoring system, and half registered lesions at the tooth surface level. Lesions were reported most often on palatal surfaces of upper anterior teeth (79% of dentists), on occlusal surfaces of lower 1st molars (74%), and on upper 1st molars (32%). Half the dentists used clinical photographs for documentation and 60% made study models. While 40% reported more erosive lesions in males, 36% reported no gender differences. High intake of carbonated beverages and acidic juices were reported as the most common cause by 97% and 72% of the dentists, respectively. Only 21% of dentists recorded the patient's dietary history, and 73% never measured saliva secretion. The majority (78%) of the dentists treated patients with erosive wear themselves. In general, the survey suggests that the dentists are relatively up to date regarding the clinical recording, diagnosis, and treatment of dental erosive wear. However, dietary and salivary analyses were not given priority, and early, preventive treatment was lacking.

Dentists' choices of restorative material indicate that the majority prefer amalgam in more challenging restorations with respect to caries activity, lesion depth, and tooth type. The findings indicate that in a period when the use of amalgam was phasing out, resin composite was the predominant material of choice for Class II restorations in children and adolescents.

The questionnaire study identifies specific knowledge gaps among Norwegian dentists with regard to curing lights and use of personal protection. Today's dependence on technology in dentistry necessitates that the operator possesses knowledge of essential technical specifications and safe use of devices and instruments routinely used in dental treatment.

Dental erosive wear (DEW) is common among children and adolescents, and a survey of Icelandic children showed that 30.7% of 15-year-olds were diagnosed with the condition. Objective. To gain knowledge about dental practitioners' experiences, opinions, and treatment decisions. Materials and Methods. A precoded questionnaire, previously used among Norwegian dentists, was sent electronically to all dentists in Iceland (n = 341). Results. The response rate was 64.2%, and 58% of dentists were male. More than half of the clinicians (54%) thought that prevalence had increased the last 10–15 years, and 67% reported it to be more common in male. Most (96%) recorded presence of DEW, but only 4% used a detailed scoring system. Lesions were mostly on occlusal surfaces of first mandibular molars (73%), on palatal in upper anterior teeth (61%), and on occlusal of maxillary first molars (36%). Most dentists (74%) reported a probable cause, e.g., high consumption of carbonated beverages (98%), acidic juices (68%), sport drinks (58%), reflux (54%), and eating disorders (20%). Dietary history was often recorded by 38%, and 65% never measured saliva. Most of the dentists (88%) treated patients themselves, and half of them preferred prevention with high fluoride and resin sealants. While some dentists wanted to restore teeth more invasively, most considered to restore with a filling. Conclusion. Icelandic dentists seem to be well educated for diagnosis and treatment of dental erosion, and dentists are aware of a minimally invasive approach. Clinical Significance. It is challenging for dentists to make the best treatment decision for patients with DEW, both in a short perspective and long perspective. At present, little is known about their knowledge and treatment approach, and there is no standard treatment which can be recommended. Therefore, the present study investigated dental practitioners' treatment decisions, as well as knowledge, experiences, and awareness of DEW.

BackgroundThe study aimed to explore the variability between the treatment decisions dentists make for MIH-affected teeth.MethodsIn 2009, a pre-coded questionnaire was sent electronically to all dentists employed by the Public Dental Service (PDS) in Norway (n = 1061). The questions were related to treatment of MIH-affected teeth, including three patient cases illustrated by photographs and written case descriptions.ResultsReplies were obtained from 61.5 % of the respondents after two reminders. In the first case, showing a newly erupted first permanent molar with moderate hypomineralization and no disintegration of the surface enamel, the preferred treatment among the majority of the respondents (53.5 %) was application of fluoride varnish, while 19.6 % would seal the fissure with GIC material. In the second case, showing a severely damaged first permanent molar in a six year old child, more than half of the respondents (57.5 %) would place a conventional glass ionomer restoration and 10.5 % would use a stainless steel crown (SSC). In the third case, showing a severely damaged permanent first molar in a nine year old child, 43.8 % of the dentists would remove only the parts with soft, damaged enamel; while 35.2 % would remove more and 21.0 % would remove all affected enamel and leave the cavity margins in sound enamel.ConclusionsThe survey shows that there is a wide disparity between clinicians’ views on how MIH affected teeth should be treated. In a severely affected first permanent molar, only a minority of dentists would remove as much tooth substance as needed to get the full benefit of the acid etch pattern in sound enamel.

The idea of "minimal intervention dentistry" seems to have great influence among dentists in PDS (Norway), as they seek to preserve dental hard tissue as much as possible by choosing repair before replacement. No gender differences were observed, but older dentists seem to favour repair compared with the younger dentists.