ABSTRACT

Aim: To determine the factors affecting the selection of material of choice in posterior teeth.

Methods: Descriptive cross-sectional study done June-December 2015 at Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro. Individuals who refused to participate in the study were eliminated from the sample. Each dentist signed an informed consent form. Personal data were entered on a proforma/consent form. The data collection tool was a Proforma/Questionnaire with all required questions. Dentists were personally briefed on the study's objectives and the importance of their participation. Informed permission forms were gathered one week later. Not returning the questionnaires after two professional visits was deemed participant loss. The analysis employed descriptive statistics and SPSS version 17.0.

Results: 200 people responded to the survey. 70% advised amalgam for posterior tooth repair, 28% recommended composite, and 2% recommended Glass Ionomer. In this study, 65% selected amalgam, 34% preferred composite, and 1% preferred glass ionomer. In this series, 60% of people selected amalgam, followed by composite (37%), and glass ionomer (3%).  In this series, 60% chose amalgam, while 40% chose composite. No glass ionomer In this study, 55% of participants advocated composite, 40% recommended amalgam, and 5% recommended GIC. Patients' preferences impacted material selection for posterior restorations in this study: 55% chose amalgam, 35% composite, and 10% glass ionomer. Most participants (60%) picked composite for moisture management, followed by amalgam (35%), and GIC (5%).

Conclusion: Most posterior teeth restorations involve amalgam fillings. Determinants include strength, durability, color match and dental structure preservation. Amalgam was connected to strength, while composite saved tooth structure. 

Keywords: Amalgam; Composite; Material Choice; Pakistani Dentists