ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIM: Children with special healthcare needs (CSHCN) often face oral health challenges. This retrospective cross-sectional study at a university hospital aimed to determine CSHCN's medical spectrum, dental treatment needs, and mode of treatment: general anesthesia (GA) or outpatient dental care (ODC). DESIGN: Data from the Department of Conservative Dentistry, Heidelberg University Hospital, 2012-2022, were reviewed, considering age, gender, International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnoses, caries experience (dmft/DMFT), restorative parameters, and treatment under GA/ODC. For patients under GA, their American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification was considered. Descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U-test and logistic regression were utilized. RESULTS: Of 669 patients, congenital and chromosomal malformations (34.7%), diseases of the nervous system (19.1%), and mental and behavioral disorders (16.0%) were mainly diagnosed. Dentin caries prevalence was high at 79.1%, with treatments performed mainly under GA (51.4%). The odds of receiving treatment under GA decreased with patient age and increased with higher dmft/DMFT scores. Most under GA were classified as ASA 3 (51.7%), indicating high anesthesia risks. CONCLUSION: Children with special healthcare needs often have diseases that can lead to higher challenges related to cooperation. The high prevalence of dentin caries underscores the substantial need for dental treatments, which were consequently often performed under GA, despite the associated risks. These findings stress the need for trained dental professionals.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this pilot study was to test the survival and clinical quality of frugal methods to replace single missing teeth in the posterior region with direct composite restorations of different categories. METHODS: We performed a detailed intraoral examination and assessed the clinical quality of the restorations according to modified FDI-criteria. Irreparable loss of a restoration was recorded as "failure" (F). Damaged restorations that could be repaired were defined as "survival with repair" (SR). Restorations without any unfavorable events were classified as "success" (S). RESULTS: The mean follow-up time of the restorations was 5.07 years (minimum = 1; maximum = 21.5), with 15.1% having a follow-up time of more than 10 years. Three unfavorable events were documented. Two restorations (3.8%) were classified as F, one restoration (1.9%) as SR, and the remaining 50 restorations (94.3%) as S. The estimated overall and functional survival rate at 5 years using the Kaplan-Meier method was 96.2% (confidence interval [CI]:85.5% to 99%) and 98% (CI:86.9% to 99.7%), respectively. Ninety-four percent of the restorations were evaluated as good or excellent clinical quality. Most restorations showed no periodontal complications, however, restorations in the mandible showed significantly more plaque accumulation (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: These conservative frugal methods to replace single missing teeth in the posterior region showed promising clinical survival data and quality parameters. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Direct composite restorations of different categories can be considered as additional treatment option for gap closure in specific clinical situations.
