Panorama atual da utilização do amálgama aderido: avaliação entre cirurgiões-dentistas
Current view on the use of the bonded amalgam technique: an evaluation among dentists
Mastrantonio, S.S.; Coldebella, C.R.; Gondim, J.O.; Diniz, M.B.; Sacono, N.T.; Cordeiro, R.C.L.
Rev. odontol. UNESP, vol.37, n4, p.395-399, 2008
Resumo
O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar, pela aplicação de um questionário específico, o conhecimento e a utilização da técnica do amálgama aderido pelos cirurgiões-dentistas. Seiscentos e cinco profissionais (clínico geral e/ou especialista em Odontopediatria e/ou Dentística) participaram da pesquisa durante o 24º Congresso Internacional de Odontologia de São Paulo. A análise descritiva dos dados evidenciou que 404 cirurgiões-dentistas conheciam a técnica e, destes, 57,8% a aprenderam durante a graduação e 21,8%, em cursos de atualização e/ou aperfeiçoamento. Dentre os que conheciam a técnica, apenas 107 (26,6%) a utilizavam, principalmente em situações clínicas envolvendo grande perda da estrutura dentária (45,79%), em pacientes de baixo poder econômico (26,16%) e em pacientes de alto risco à cárie (30,84%). A falta de experiência clínica (38,98%) e o comprometimento estético (33,22%) foram as principais razões para a não utilização da técnica. O cimento de ionômero de vidro (50%) e o sistema adesivo (38,5%) foram os materiais mais empregados em associação ao amálgama. Conclui-se que o fato dos profissionais conhecerem a técnica do amálgama aderido não significou que a utilizam.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate, through the application of a specific questionnaire, dentists´ knowledge and the use of the bonded amalgam technique. Six hundred and five professionals (general dental practitioner and/or specialist in Pediatric Dentistry and/or Operative Dentistry) had participated of the research during the 24th International Congress of Dentistry of São Paulo. The descriptive analysis of the data evidenced that 404 dentists knew the technique, and from this amount, 57.8% had learned it during graduation and 21.8% in refinement or update courses. Amongst the ones that knew the technique, only 107 (26.6%) used it, mainly in clinical situations involving great loss of dental structure (45.79%), in patients of lower economical classes (26.16%) and in patients of high caries risk (30.84%). The lack of clinical experience (38.98%) and the aesthetic involvement (33.22%) were the main reasons for not using the technique. The glass ionomer cement (50%) and the adhesive system (38.5%) had been the most used materials in association to the amalgam. It was concluded that despite the majority of the interviewed professionals knew the technique, few of them have been using it.
Keywords
Dentistry, dental amalgam, questionnaires
References
1. Fuks AB. The use of amalgam in pediatric dentistry. Pediatr Dent. 2002;24:448-55.
2. Osborne JW, Summitt JB, Roberts HW. The use of dental amalgam in pediatric dentistry: review of the literature. Pediatr Dent. 2002;24:439-47.
3. Jordan RE, Suzuki M, Balanko M. Bonded silver amalgam restorations. J Can Dent Assoc. 1992;58:817-9.
4. Dunne SM, Gainsford ID, Wilson NH. Current materials and techniques for direct restorations in posterior teeth. Part 1: Silver amalgam. Int Dent J. 1997;47:123-36.
5. Duran SM, Lima AG, Gonçalves SEP. Amálgama adesivo com CIV: avaliação da influência do tempo de armazenamento na microinfiltração. Rev Odontol UNESP. 2004;33:19-23.
6. Ben-Amar A. Reduction of microleakage around new amalgam restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 1989;119:725-8.
7. Stevenson MF. Modified bonded amalgam technique. Br Dent J. 1983;155:401.
8. Zardiackas LD, Stoner GE. Tensile and shear adhesion of amalgam to tooth structure using selective interfacial amalgamation. Biomaterials. 1983;4:9-13.
9. Varga J, Matsumura H, Masuhara E. Bonding of amalgam filling to tooth cavity with adhesive resin. Dent Mater J. 1986;5:158-64.
10. Aboush YE, Elderton RJ. Bonding dental amalgam to a light-curing glass-ionomer liner/base. Br Dent J. 1991;170:219-22.
11. Shimizu A, Ui T, Kawakami M, Tsuchitani Y. Amalgam restorations using an adhesive resin cement as a cavity liner – basic technique and three clinical cases. J Osaka Univ Dent Sch. 1987;27:147-55.
12. Staninec M, Holt M. Bonding of amalgam to tooth structure: tensile adhesion and microleakage. J Prosthet Dent. 1988;59:379-402.
13. Cordeiro RCL, Lima EB. Efeito de um sistema adesivo e de um cimento de ionômero de vidro na resistência ao cisalhamento do amálgama aderido à dentina de dentes decíduos. Rev Portug Estomatol Med Dent Cirur Maxilofac. 2001;42:51-7.
14. Cenci MS, Piva E, Potrich F, Formolo E, Demarco FF, Powers JM. Microleakage in bonded amalgam restorations using different adhesive materials. Braz Dent J. 2004;15:13-8.
15. Rasheed AA. Effect of bonding amalgam on the reinforcement of teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93:51-5.
16. Chen RS, Liu CC, Cheng MR, Lin CP. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner. Oper Dent. 2000;25:411-7.
17. Lindemuth JS, Hagge MS, Broome JS. Effect of restoration size on fracture resistance of bonded amalgam restorations. Oper Dent. 2000;25:177-81.
18. Geiger SB, Mazor Y, Klein E, Judes H. Characterization of dentin-bonding-amalgam interfaces. Oper Dent. 2001;26:239-47.
19. Christensen GJ. Should we be bonding all tooth restorations? J Am Dent Assoc. 1994;125:193-4.
20. Gwinnett AJ, Baratieri LN, Monteiro SJr, Ritter AV. Adhesive restorations with amalgam: guidelines for the clinician. Quintessence Int. 1994;25:687-95.
21. Smales RJ, Wetherell JD. Bonded amalgam restorations. Austr Dent J. 1994;39:128.
22. Guelmann M, Mjör IA, Jerrell GR. The teaching of class I and II restorations in primary molars: a survey of North American dental schools. Pediatric Dent. 2001;23:410-4.
23. Guelmann M, Mjör IA. Materials and techniques for restoration of primary molars by pediatric dentists in Florida. Pediatr Dent. 2002;24:326-31.
24. Hu SW, Yang LC, Chang HY. Factors associated with amalgam restorations in Taiwan. Br Dent J. 2002;193:411-4.
25. Tran LA, Messer LB. Clinicians’ choices of restorative materials for children. Aust Dent J. 2003;48:221-32.
26. Pair RL, Udin RD, Tanbonliong T. Materials used to restore class II lesions in primary molars: a survey of California pediatric dentists. Pediatr Dent. 2004;26:501-7.
27. Salant P, Dillman DA. How to conduct your own survey. New York: John Witey & Sons; 1994.
28. Buerkle V, Kuehnisch J, Guelmann M, Hickel R. Restoration materials for primary molars – results from a European survey. J Dent. 2005;33:275-81.
29. Motisuki C, Lima LM, Santos-Pinto L, Guelmann M. Restorative treatment on class I and II restorations in primary molars: survey of Brazilian dental schools. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2005;30:175-8.
30. Van Meerbeek B, Vanherle G, Lesaffre E, Braem M, Lambrechts P. Trends in the selection of dental filling materials. J Dent. 1991;19:207-13.
31. Silva NN. Amostra probabilística: um curso introdutório. 2ª ed. São Paulo: Edusp; 2001.
32. Sadowsky SJ. An overview of treatment considerations for esthetic restorations: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96:433-42.
33. Al-Moayad M, Aboush YE, Elderton RJ. Bonded amalgam restorations: a comparative study of glass-ionomer and resin adhesives. Br Dent J. 1993;175:363-7.
34. Pilo R, Brosh T, Chweidan H. Cusp reinforcement by bonding of amalgam restorations. J Dent. 1998;26:467-72.
35. Dias de Souza GM, Pereira GD, Dias CT, Paulillo LA. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with bonded amalgam technique. Oper Dent. 2001;26:511-5.
36. Nicholson JW, Croll TP. Glass-ionomer cements in restorative dentistry. Quintessence Int. 1997;28:705-14.
37. Hotz P, McLean JW, Sced I, Wilson AD. The bonding of glass ionomer cements to metal and tooth substrates. Br Dent J. 1977;142:41-7.
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email