Knowledge and attitudes of general dental practitioners towards posterior composite restorations in northern saudi arabia
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 20, 2026
The Slice Culture Method for Following Development of Tooth Germs In Explant Culture
Published on: November 13, 2013
1Assistant Professsor, Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Aljouf University , Sakaka, Saudi Arabia .
Introduction:
The restoration of posterior teeth with composite restoration is a common clinical practice nowadays. Opinions regarding posterior composite restorations vary among dentists. The aim of the present study was to determine the knowledge and opinions of general dental practitioners towards composite resins for posterior teeth restorations.
Materials And Methods:
A questionnaire was devised to elicit information regarding placement of composite restoration in posterior teeth in northern Saudi Arabia. It was distributed to 230 dentists by hand and e-mail. A response rate 136 (59%) was obtained. The questionnaire sought details about case selection criteria for composite restoration, problems associated with composites and reasons for selecting composite restoration in posterior teeth. The data was processed and analysed by SPSS statistical software 19. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for various responses of the participants.
Results:
Regarding the selection of composite restoration in posterior teeth, 97% of the dentists did not prefer composite placement for class I restoration with heavy occlusal contacts. 83% of the participants did not select composite for class II restoration. 78% of the respondents opted for restoring composites in small defects. Patients' aesthetic demands (90%), amalgam replacement (22%) and restoration of endodontically treated teeth (42%) were the contributing factors. Regarding the problems associated with posterior composite restorations. Recurrent caries (87%), post-operative sensitivity (84%), restoration fracture (83%) and polymerization shrinkage (73%) were the major problems reported by respondents associated with composite restorations. The other minor concerns were wear (60%), contact build up in case of class II cavity restorations (51%) and isolation for composite restorations (36%). Conservative cavity preparation (78%), aesthetics (73%) and patient preference (65%) were the main reasons for choosing composite restoration for the posterior teeth.
Conclusion:
Posterior composites are not popular among dentists practicing in northern Saudi Arabia and there is a need of continued professional education and clinical training for the dentists for posterior composite restorations.
