Premium
Dentists' restorative decision‐making and implications for an ‘amalgamless’ profession. Part 1: a review
Author(s) -
Alexander G,
Hopcraft MS,
Tyas MJ,
Wong RHK
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
australian dental journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.701
H-Index - 71
eISSN - 1834-7819
pISSN - 0045-0421
DOI - 10.1111/adj.12209
Subject(s) - amalgam (chemistry) , context (archaeology) , dentistry , posterior teeth , restorative dentistry , resin composite , medicine , composite number , computer science , archaeology , history , chemistry , electrode , algorithm
The Minamata Convention has agreed to a worldwide reduction and ultimate elimination in the production and use of mercury containing products. This will have implications for the practice of dentistry. Australian organizations' pronouncements on the issue are limited and research examining the Australian context dated. The restoration of teeth with direct materials has changed significantly since the 1980s. Up to this time amalgam was the material of choice for direct posterior restorations. Its properties and guidelines for placement were, and remain, well established. Resin composite has replaced amalgam as the material of choice in many clinical situations. Despite inherent clinical disadvantages compared to amalgam, there continues to be a shift toward greater use of resin composite. There is consensus worldwide that the restoration of posterior teeth using resin composite now exceeds that of amalgam. The reasons for this are reviewed in this article along with current evidence and commentary relating to direct restorative and evidence‐based decision‐making, minimally invasive approaches, and approaches to education. The implications for these in an ‘amalgamless’ profession are identified.