Dentists’ Knowledge and Clinical Experience towards Molar-Incisor-Hypomineralization in Iran

Sajadi, Fatemeh Sadat; Hasheminejad, Naimeh; Mehdizadeh, Alireza; Eskandarizadeh, Ali; Rostamizadeh, Mohammadreza

doi:10.1590/pboci.2021.134

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Composite resin and PMCs were the materials of choice for the treatment of severely-affected molars. These findings are in agreement with some of the previous studies [5,6,12,20,24] but not in consistent with others [10,18,21] that reported glass-ionomer cements (GICs) or resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (RMGICs) as the material of choice. The present study showed that more PDs reported PMCs as the ideal treatment, as has been previously reported [12,18].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A cross-sectional survey on knowledge and attitudes of Greek dentists regarding molar incisor hypomineralisation diagnosis and treatment

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Molar Incisor Hypomineralisation (MIH) remains a challenge for clinicians underlining the gap in the literature regarding the condition. The study aimed to record knowledge and attitudes of Greek dentists regarding diagnosis and treatment of MIH and correlate findings with non-dental characteristics. Methods It is a cross-sectional study based on a questionnaire consisting of 37 multiple-choice questions. Data regarding diagnosis, aetiopathogenesis, and clinical management of MIH were collected from active members of three Greek Dental Associations. Chi-square and student’s t-test were used to correlate responses with practitioners’ characteristics and odds ratios calculated to evaluate differences on treatment of MIH-affected teeth (p < 0.05). Results From the 360 participants (response rate = 94%), 185 were general dental practitioners (GDPs) and 175 dental specialists (59 paediatric dentists (PDs), 38 orthodontists and 78 of other specialties).MIH was commonly encountered as a clinical problem, with GDPs reporting genetics and fluoride intake as common aetiological factors at significantly higher percentages as compared to PDs (p < 0.05). Permanent molars and incisors (44%) were the teeth most commonly affected, with yellow/brown demarcated opacities (68%) the most common clinical feature with PDs reporting them in a significantly higher percentage (p < 0.05). Dentists with specialisation, dentists that treat > 10 children per week and children with MIH-affected teeth had a 2–5.5 times greater probability to report difficulty achieving sufficient anaesthesia and hypersensitivity problems (p < 0.001). Agreement between GDPs’ and dental specialists’ views was found on less invasive treatment of anterior lesions. Non-PDs reported bulk-fill restorations and onlays as the ideal treatment of severely-affected posterior teeth, as compared to PDs that preferred preformed metal crowns (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the age of the clinician, years of experience and number of children treated per week were the factors significantly associated with the decision for the treatment of only severely-affected posterior MIH teeth. Conclusions Most participants had encountered MIH-affected teeth in their clinical practice and were able to recognize main aetiological factors and clinical findings related to the condition. Nevertheless, their knowledge regarding treatment is limited.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Up to date, there is limited evidence, from questionnaire-based surveys in Europe, Asia and Australia [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] regarding knowledge and attitudes of dentists about MIH. All studies reported that it is a widespread clinical problem, whose diagnosis and management is challenging.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%