ABSTRACT
@#Questionnaires were distributed to 55 Public Health and Defence Force dental clinics throughout Papua New Guinea in order to ascertain storage and clinical conditions, as well as information related to the type, consumption and performance of alginate and elastomeric impression materials and composite restorative materials. Of the 39 respondents, representing a 71% return, few reported any problems with either of the two types of impression materials. However, complaints associated with the use of paste-paste composites, Adaptic and Concise, were a major concern. It was assumed that the problems were caused by exposure to excessively high temperatures during shipment, distribution and storage of these materials throughout Papua New Guinea. Alternative materials, which are less sensitive to heat, were proposed for use in Papua New Guinea. These were a light-activated composite (Durafill), a powder-liquid composite (Powderlite) and a powder-water glass ionomer (Chemfil II).