J Korean Acad Conserv Dent.  2010 Mar;35(2):116-124. 10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.2.116.

Comparison of operative techniques between female and male dentists in class 2 and class 5 resin composite restorations

• Chang J
• Kim HY
• Son HH

• KMID: 2176299
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.2.116

Abstract

This study aimed to assess whether the gender of the dental practitioner affects operative techniques in class 2 and class 5 resin composite restorations. In 2008, a nationwide survey was given to Korean dentists. Total 12,193 e-mails were distributed, 2,632 were opened by recipients, and 840 responses were collected. Of the respondents, 78.9% were male and 21.1% were female. The gender distribution in the age groups between respondents and the total population did not differ (p > 0.05). A chi-square test was used to compare technical differences between female and male dentists. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between gender and operative techniques in resin composite restoration. For class 2 resin composite restoration, female dentists were 1.87 times more likely than male dentists to do multiple incremental fillings (four layers or more) and 2.72 times more likely than males to spend 30 minutes or more for the treatment (p < 0.05). For class 5 resin composite restoration, female dentists were 2.69 times more likely than their male counterparts to use a cavity base or liner, 1.83 times more likely to do multiple incremental fillings (four layers or more) and 1.63 times more likely to spend 20 minutes or more for the procedure (p < 0.05). The gender factor was influential to individual operative techniques in restorative treatment.

Keyword

Survey; Gender difference; Operative technique; Female dentist; Class 2 resin; Class 5 resin

MeSH Terms

Surveys and Questionnaires
Dentists
Electronic Mail
Female
Humans
Logistic Models
Male

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Exemplary case of noncarious cervical lesion in class 5 resin composite restoration.

Reference

1. Murray JJ. Better opportunities for women dentists: a review of the contribution of women dentists to the workforce. Br Dent J. 2002. 192(4):191–196.

2. http://blog.korea.kr/app/log/nsodmd/40223475.

3. http://www.jda.or.jp/en/index.html#intro.

4. Kronstrom M, Palmqvist S, Soderfeldt B, Carlsson GE. Dentist-related factors influencing the amount of prosthodontic treatment provided. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2000. 28(3):185–194.

5. Hjalmers K, Soderfeldt B, Axtelius B. Moral values and career: factors shaping the image of healthy work for female dentists. Acta Odontol Scand. 2006. 64(5):255–261.

6. Rasmussen JK, Frederiksen JA, Hallonsten AL, Poulsen S. Danish dentists' knowledge, attitudes and management of procedural dental pain in children: association with demographic characteristics, structural factors, perceived stress during the administration of local analgesia and their tolerance towards pain. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005. 15(3):159–168.

7. Kunzel C, Sadowsky D. Assessing HIV-related attitudes and orientations of male and female general dentists. J Am Dent Assoc. 1995. 126(7):862–871.

8. Atchison KA, Bibb CA, Lefever KH, Mito RS, Lin S, Engelhardt R. Gender differences in career and practice patterns of PGD-trained dentists. J Dent Educ. 2002. 66(12):1358–1367.

9. Spencer AJ, Lewis JM. The practice of dentistry by male and female dentists. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1988. 16(4):202–207.

10. Berthelsen H, Hjalmers K, Soderfeldt B. Perceived social support in relation to work among Danish general dental practitioners in private practices. Eur J Oral Sci. 2008. 116(2):157–163.

11. Bruers JJ, Felling AJ, Truin GJ, van't Hof MA, van Rossum GM. Patient orientation and professional orientation of Dutch dentists. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2004. 32(2):115–124.

12. Palotie U, Vehkalahti MM. Finnish dentists' perceptions of the longevity of direct dental restorations. Acta Odontol Scand. 2009. 67(1):44–49.

13. Kronstrom M, Palmqvist S, Soderfeldt B. Prosthodontic decision making among general dentists in Sweden. III: The choice between fixed partial dentures and single implants. Int J Prosthodont. 2000. 13(1):34–40.

14. Hickel R, Roulet JF, Bayne S, Heintze SD, Mjor IA, Peters M, et al. Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2007. 11(1):5–33.

15. Chang J, Kim HY, Cho BH, Lee IB, Son HH. Information resources and material selection in bonded restorations among korean dentists. J Adhes Dent. 2009. 11(6):439–446.

16. Shin DH, Park SE, Yang IS, Chang JH, Lee IB, Cho BH, Son HH. A Survey on the Use of Composite Resin in Class II Restoration in Korea. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2009. 34(2):87–94.

17. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Rashid RG. Dentists'molar restoration choices and longevity: a web-based survey. J Prosthet Dent. 2004. 91(4):363–367.

18. McCarthy GM, MacDonald JK. Nonresponse bias in a national study of dentists' infection control practices and attitudes related to HIV. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997. 25(4):319–323.

19. McFarlane E, Olmsted MG, Murphy J, Hill CA. Nonresponse bias in a mail survey of physicians. Eval Health Prof. 2007. 30(2):170–185.

20. Park J, Chang J, Ferracane J, Lee IB. How should composite be layered to reduce shrinkage stress: incremental or bulk filling? Dent Mater. 2008. 24(11):1501–1505.

21. Summitt JB RJ, Hilton TJ, Schwartz RS, dos Santos J. Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry. 2006. Quintessence books.

22. Li Q, Jepsen S, Albers HK, Eberhard J. Flowable materials as an intermediate layer could improve the marginal and internal adaptation of composite restorations in Class-V-cavities. Dent Mater. 2006. 22(3):250–257.

23. Awliya WY, El-Sahn AM. Leakage pathway of Class V cavities restored with different flowable resin composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2008. 33(1):31–36.

24. Cadenaro M, Marchesi G, Antoniolli F, Davidson C, De Stefano Dorigo E, Breschi L. Flowability of composites is no guarantee for contraction stress reduction. Dent Mater. 2009. 25(5):649–654.

25. Unemori M, Matsuya Y, Akashi A, Goto Y, Akamine A. Composite resin restoration and postoperative sensitivity: clinical follow-up in an undergraduate program. J Dent. 2001. 29(1):7–13.

26. Sidhu SK, Henderson LJ. In vitro marginal leakage of cervical composite restorations lined with a light-cured glass ionomer. Oper Dent. 1992. 17(1):7–12.

27. Ernst CP, Canbek K, Aksogan K, Willershausen B. Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner. Clin Oral Investig. 2003. 7(3):129–134.

28. Pongprueksa P, Kuphasuk W, Senawongse P. Effect of elastic cavity wall and occlusal loading on microleakage and dentin bond strength. Oper Dent. 2007. 32(5):466–475.

29. McCarthy GM, MacDonald JK. Gender differences in characteristics, infection control practices, knowledge and attitudes related to HIV among Ontario dentists. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1996. 24(6):412–415.