The Opinions of Manufacturers of Resin-Based Composite Materials towards the Repair of Failing Composite Restorations

Aim To investigate the opinions of manufacturers of resin-based composite (RBC) towards the repair of their materials. Methods Representatives of 20 manufacturers of RBC were electronically mailed a questionnaire seeking information on aspects of the repair of direct composite restorations. Results The response rate was 100%. The findings indicated that although the majority of respondents regarded repair as a viable option for managing failing direct RBC restorations, marked variations were found to exist regarding recommendations for and contra-indications to performing repairs of RBC restorations. Conclusions Within the limitations of the current study, the following conclusions can be drawn: (1) the majority of manufacturers of RBC materials are aware and in favour of repair as opposed to replacement of defective composite restorations; (2) there is a need for manufacturers to produce guidelines for repair of their materials; and (3) there is a need for robust randomised controlled dental practice-based clinical studies in the field of repair of composite restorations.

[1]  L. Mair,et al.  Bonding of composite to water aged composite with surface treatments. , 2007, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[2]  J. T. Newton,et al.  A cohort investigation of the changes in vocational dental practitioners' views on repairing defective direct composite restorations , 2005, BDJ.

[3]  E. Swift,et al.  Shear bond strength of self-etching bonding systems in combination with various composites used for repairing aged composites. , 2005, The journal of adhesive dentistry.

[4]  I. Blum,et al.  The repair of defective direct composite restorations in dental practice , 2003 .

[5]  P. Vallittu,et al.  Composite-composite repair bond strength: effect of different adhesion primers. , 2003, Journal of dentistry.

[6]  I. Mjör,et al.  Teaching students the repair of resin-based composite restorations: a survey of North American dental schools. , 2003, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[7]  I. Mjör,et al.  The repair of direct composite restorations: an international survey of the teaching of operative techniques and materials. , 2003, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[8]  I. Mjör,et al.  Defective direct composite restorations--replace or repair? A survey of teaching in Scandinavian dental schools. , 2003, Swedish dental journal.

[9]  I. Mjör,et al.  Repair versus replacement of defective direct composite restorations in teaching programmes in United Kingdom and Irish Dental Schools. , 2002, The European journal of prosthodontics and restorative dentistry.

[10]  I. Mjör,et al.  Reasons for placement and replacement of restorations in student clinics in Manchester and Athens. , 2000, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[11]  F Toffenetti,et al.  Secondary caries: a literature review with case reports. , 2000, Quintessence international.

[12]  I. Mjör,et al.  Selection of restorative materials, reasons for replacement, and longevity of restorations in Florida. , 1998, The Journal of the American College of Dentists.

[13]  G. Christensen.  Overcoming challenges with resin in Class II situations. , 1997, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[14]  I. Mjör.  Selection of restorative materials in general dental practice in Sweden. , 1997, Acta odontologica Scandinavica.

[15]  G. Christensen.  Acceptability of alternatives for conservative restoration of posterior teeth. , 1995, Journal of esthetic dentistry.

[16]  I. Mjör.  Repair versus replacement of failed restorations. , 2023, International dental journal.