Do External Factors Affect Materials’ Evaluation and Preferences? Comments Related to Observations from a Focus Group
Tóm tắt
To discuss if external factors can affect materials’ evaluation and preferences. Restorations were placed by a group of dentists in standardized cavities in typodont teeth under two conditions: the double-blind test, with unidentified composites, and the conscious test, with materials available in the original packages. Viscosity, adherence to the instrument, ease of sculpture, and general handling were evaluated. Ease of use and literature were the most considered criteria, while material’s cost and peer opinion were the ones with the greatest disagreement. Both the degree of satisfaction and the selection of the preferred material were dependent on the condition of the evaluation. External factors affect materials’ evaluation and preferences.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Ilie N, Hilton TJ, Heintze SD, Hickel R, Watts DC, Silikas N, Stansbury JW, Cadenaro M, Ferracane JL. Academy of Dental Materials guidance-resin composites: part I-mechanical properties. Dent Mater. 2017;33:880–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.04.013.
Ferracane JL, Hilton TJ, Stansbury JW, Watts DC, Silikas N, Ilie N, Heintze S, Cadenaro M, Hickel R. Academy of Dental Materials guidance-resin composites: part II-technique sensitivity (handling, polymerization, dimensional changes). Dent Mater. 2017;33:1171–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.08.188.
Opdam N, Frankenberger R, Magne P. From ‘direct versus indirect’ toward an integrated restorative concept in the posterior dentition. Oper Dent. 2016;41:S27–34. https://doi.org/10.2341/15-126-LIT.
Alexander G, Hopcraft MS, Tyas MJ, Wong R. Dentists’ restorative decision-making and implications for an ‘amalgamless’ profession. Part 4: clinical factor. Aust Dent J. 2017;62:363–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12519.
Bayne SC, Ferracane JL, Marshall GW, Marshall SJ, van Noort R. The evolution of dental materials over the past century: silver and gold to tooth color and beyond. J Dent Res. 2019;98:257–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034518822808.
Ferracane JL, Lawson NC. Probing the hierarchy of evidence to identify the best strategy for placing class II dental composite restorations using current materials. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021;33(1):39–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12686.
Kaleem M, Satterthwaiti JD, Watts DC. A method for assessing force/work parameters for stickiness of unset resin-composites. Dent Mater. 2011;27:805–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.04.005.
Ertl K, Graf A, Watts D, Schedle A. Stickiness of dental resin composite materials to steel, dentin and bonded dentin. Dent Mater. 2010;26:59–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.08.006.
Donovan TE. Promising indeed: the role of ‘“experts”’ and practitioners in the introduction and use of new materials and techniques in restorative dentistry. J Esthet Rest Dent. 2004;16:331–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2004.tb00063.x.
Bonetti D, Johnston M, Clarkson JE, Grimshaw J, Pitts NB, Eccles M, Steen N, Thomas R, Maclennan G, Glidewell L, Walker A. Applying psychological theories to evidence-based clinical practice: identifying factors predictive of placing preventive fissure sealants. Implement Sci. 2010;8:25. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-25.
Matthews DC, McNeil K, Brillant M, Tax C, Maillet P, McCulloch CA, Glogauer M. Factors influencing adoption of new technologies into dental practice: a qualitative study. JDR Clin Trans Res. 2016;1:77–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/2380084415627129.
Mallinson DJ, Hatemi PK. The effects of information and social conformity on opinion change. PLoS One. 2018;13(5):e0196600. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196600.
Richardson DC. Social psychology for dummies. Hoboken: Wiley; 2014.
Shaw K, Martins R, Hadis MA, Burke T, Palin W. ‘Own-label’ versus branded commercial dental resin composite materials: mechanical and physical property comparisons. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2016;24:122–9. https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_01559Shaw08.
Schwendicke F, Stolpe M. Restoring root-canal treated molars: cost-effectiveness-analysis of direct versus indirect restorations. J Dent. 2018;18:37–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.07.007.
Schwendicke F, Göstemeyer G, Stolpe M, Krois J. Amalgam alternatives: cost-effectiveness and value of information analysis. J Dent Res. 2018;97:1317–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034518782671.
Schwendicke F, Kramer EJ, Krois J, Meyer-Lueckel H, Wierichs RJ. Long-term costs of post-restorations: 7-year practice-based results from Germany. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(4):2175–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03529-5.
Braga MM, Machado GM, Rocha ES, ViganÓ ME, Pontes LRA, Raggio DP. How can we associate an economic evaluation with a clinical trial? Braz Oral Res. 2020;34 Suppl 2:e076. This review presents fundamental basic elements to be considered in studies related to the influence of economic aspects on clinical aspects.
Asch SE. Opinions and social pressure. Sci Am. 1955;193:31–5. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0076.
Thyvalikakath T, Song M, Schleyer T. Perceptions and attitudes toward performing risk assessment for periodontal disease: a focus group exploration. BMC Oral Health. 2018; 18(1):90. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0550-2. It presents an interesting example of the application of the use of focus groups.
Kredo T, Cooper S, Abrams A, Muller J, Volmink J, Atkins S. Using the behavior change wheel to identify barriers to and potential solutions for primary care clinical guideline use in four provinces in South Africa. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):965. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3778-2.
Davis AL, Zare H, McCleary R, Kanwar O, Tolbert E, Gaskin DJ. Maryland dentists’ perceptions and attitudes toward dental therapy. J Public Health Dent. 2020;80(3):227–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/jphd.12372.
Heft MW, Fox CH, Duncan RP. Assessing the translation of research and innovation into dental practice. JDR Clin Trans Res. 2020;5:262–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/2380084419879391. Demonstrates that innovations that are directly related to clinical procedures are considered impactful and that future research should consider cost-effectiveness and patient perception aspects.