Premium
Postcementation hypersensitivity: Scientific data versus dentists’ perceptions
Author(s) -
Rosenstiel Stephen F.,
Rashid Robert G.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
journal of prosthodontics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.902
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1532-849X
pISSN - 1059-941X
DOI - 10.1016/s1059-941x(03)00010-x
Subject(s) - incidence (geometry) , medicine , the internet , ranking (information retrieval) , dentistry , family medicine , perception , psychology , computer science , information retrieval , world wide web , physics , neuroscience , optics
Purpose The purpose of this article was to obtain dentists’ opinions via an Internet survey as to the prevalence, causes, and prevention of postcementation sensitivity and compare their responses with published data on the problem. Materials and Methods Information as to respondents opinions of postcementation sensitivity was obtained from an Internet survey asking about their experience and for a ranking of the importance of each of 15 factors. Results A total of 466 valid responses were received. The incidence of postcementation sensitivity was estimated to be less than 2% by more than 2/3 of the dentists. The factors considered “very important” in reducing sensitivity by more than 50% of the respondents were desiccation, luting agent, occlusion, provisional, and water spray. Conclusions Comparing respondents’ opinions with published clinical studies, the incidence of postcementation sensitivity appears to be underestimated. There is little published evidence to support the importance of antimicrobials, desensitizing, or bonding agents, although these are considered effective by some dentists. Many respondents consider luting agent to be an important variable.