Techniques and materials used by general dentists during endodontic treatment procedures: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about which materials and techniques general dentists (GDs) use during endodontic procedures. The objectives were to quantify GDs' use of specific endodontic tools, quantify inappropriate use, and ascertain whether inappropriate use is associated with GDs' practice characteristics. METHODS: GDs in The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network reported in a questionnaire materials and techniques they use during endodontic procedures. RESULTS: Among eligible GDs, 1,490 (87%) participated. Most (93%; n = 1,383) used sodium hypochlorite to irrigate. The most commonly used sealers were zinc oxide eugenol (43%) and resin (40%), followed by calcium hydroxide (26%). Most (62%; n = 920) used a compaction obturation technique; 36% (n = 534) used a carrier-based method. Most (96%; n = 1,423) used gutta-percha as a filler; 5% used paste fillers. Few used irrigants (n = 46), techniques (n = 49), or fillers (n = 10) that investigators classified as inappropriate. CONCLUSIONS: GDs use a broad range of endodontic techniques and materials, often adapting to newer technologies as they become available. Few GDs use tools that the investigators classified as inappropriate. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: GDs use many types of endodontic techniques and materials, but only a small percentage of them are inappropriate.

Rubber dam use during root canal treatment: findings from The Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

BACKGROUND: The Dental Practice-Based Research Network (DPBRN) provided a means to investigate whether certain procedures were performed routinely. The authors conducted a study to quantify rubber dam use during root canal treatment (RCT) among general dentists and to test the hypothesis that certain dentist or practice characteristics were associated with rubber dam use. METHODS: DPBRN practitioner-investigators (P-Is) answered a questionnaire that included items about rubber dam use and other forms of isolation during RCT. DPBRN enrollment questionnaire data provided information regarding practitioner and practice characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 729 (74 percent) of 991 P-Is responded; 524 were general dentists who reported providing at least some RCTs and reported the percentage of RCTs for which they used a rubber dam. Of these 524 P-Is, 44 percent used a rubber dam for all RCTs, 24 percent used it for 51 to 99 percent of RCTs, 17 percent used it for 1 to 50 percent of RCTs, and 15 percent never used it during RCT. Usage varied significantly by geographic region and practice type. The use of cotton rolls and other forms of isolation also was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Similar to other reports in the literature, not all DPBRN general dentists used a rubber dam during RCT. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Because the clinical reference standard is to use a rubber dam during RCT, increasing its use may be important.