Knowledge and Attitudes of Dental Interns and Dentists on Implants and Implant-Retained Restorations in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Maryam Alghamdi1, *, Khalid Aboalshamat2, Doaa Alghamdi3, Shroug Abed4, Halah Almahlawi5, Sereen AlKathiri6, Amal Abu Thiraa5, Afaf Alsulami6, Maha Alzughaibi7
1 Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia
2 Department of Preventive Dentistry, Dental Public Health Division, Faculty of Dentistry, Umm Al-Qura University,
Makkah, Saudi Arabia
3 Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
4 Department of Dentistry, General Dentist, Alfarabi College, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
5 Department of Dentistry, Alfarabi College, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
6 Department of Dentistry, General Dentist, Ministry of Health, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Dentistry, General Dentist, Ibn Sina
National College, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
This cross-sectional study aimed to assess the knowledge and attitudes of dental interns and dentists in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, about Cement-Retained Restoration (CRR), Screw Retained Restoration (SRR), and implant restoration.
A total of 530 dentists and students participated in the study. Data were collected using a self-administrated questionnaire modified from previous studies. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS software for t-test, linear regression, and ANOVA.
Participants had a mean score of 5.01 (SD = 1.50) for a total of nine implant-retained restoration (IRR)knowledge questions (lowest score = 0, highest score = 9), and general implant knowledge had a mean score of 3.12 (SD = 1.25) for five questions with scores of 0 to 5. The participants’ knowledge about implants significantly differed in relation to gender, place of work, and work status. Also, participant knowledge about IRR showed significant differences in relation to participants' knowledge, age, gender and place of work. The dental interns and dentists were in agreement in considering SRR to be better than CRR for six out of nine factors. Those factors were cost effectiveness, expertise required for provision, retrievability, retention, fracture resistance, and passivity of fit.
The overall knowledge of dental interns and dentists regarding implants and IRR was fair and needs to be improved, given the tendency of general dentists to engage in implant dentistry. Both dentists and interns considered CRR to be aesthetically superior, easier to fabricate, and requiring comparatively less expertise in comparison to SRR.
open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
* Address correspondence to this author at the Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org