ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to compare decision making for asymptomatic root-filled teeth among dentists with differing educational backgrounds. Case scenarios based on 14 radiographs were created and 150 participants were asked to choose from five alternative treatment decisions and to state the rationale. Demographic data of the participants were recorded. Frequency distribution and cross-tabulation were performed; chi square testing was used for comparisons and logistic regression was performed to detect significant differences. The overall response rate was 87.3%. The practitioners chose intervention predominantly with non-surgical retreatment a common choice. Poor technical quality was a driving factor, while the existing poor coronal restoration and the need for a crown were generally not taken into account by general dentists. Speciality and experience were significant factors. Practitioners were more inclined to retain rather than extract teeth. It is concluded that clear guidelines listing factors to consider for intervention are required.
