A retrospective evaluation of restorations performed at therestorative dental treatment clinic of the dentistry facultyin Adiyaman university

Aim: The study aims to retrospectively evaluate the distribution of the restorations performed at the Restorative Dental Treatment Clinic of the Dentistry Faculty in Adiyaman University between 2016 and 2019 in terms of age, gender and teeth groups. Materials and Methods: In order to examine the distribution of the restorations according to age groups, 5 different age groups were formed as 16-25, 26-35, 36-45, 46-55, and 56 and above. The distribution of the restorations according to teeth groups was evaluated in groups of incisor teeth, premolar teeth and molar teeth. The data obtained were expressed numerically (percentages), and bilateral comparison between the groups were made through Chi-Square (χ2) test. Results: In the study, 9,720 restorations performed on 4,530 patients were examined. 5,951 (59%) of the restorations were performed on females, while 3,769 (41%) of the restorations were applied to male patients. The group that received the most restorations was 16-25 age groups, whereas the least restorations were performed on the age group of 56 and above. When the distribution of the restorations was examined in terms of teeth groups, it was determined that molars were the teeth group which were restored the most, which were followed by incisor teeth group and premolar teeth group, respectively. Conclusion: When the restorations performed at the restorative dentistry were examined in terms of age, gender and teeth groups, it was determined that the need for dental treatment was the most in the young population and females. When it is considered that it was the molar teeth that needed the most treatment, it can be concluded that this situation should be evaluated in the practices of public oral and dental health and preventive dentistry.

PDF

___

1. Wang HY, Petersen PE, Bian JY, et al. The second national survey of oral health status of children and adults in China. Int Dent J 2002;52:283-90.
2. Kocanali B, Ak AT, Cogulu D. Evaluation of the dental caries risk factors in children. J Pediatr Res 2014;1:76- 9.
3. Unlu N, Sener S, Karabekiroglu S. Prevalence of first permanent molar caries in and its relationship to the oral hygiene factors of young adults. Selcuk Dent J 2014;1:14-9.
4. Gokce K, Ozel E. The recent developments in composite restorations. J Dent Fac Atatürk Univ 2005;15:52-60.
5. Kanik O, Turkun S. Recent approaches in restorative glass ionomer cements. J Dent Ege Univ 2016;37:54- 65
6. Omurlu H, Arısu HD, Eliguzeloglu E, et al. Evaluation of the clinical success of direct restorations of the patients who applied the Universıty of Gazi Faculty of Dentistry department of operative dentistry. J Dent Gazi Univ 2011;28: 23-8.
7. Dogan BG, Gokalp S. Caries status and treatment needs in Turkey, 2004. J Dent Fac Hacettepe Univ 2008;32:45-57.
8. Demirci M, Tuncer S, Uysal O, et al. The reasons for replacement of amalgam restorations. J Dental Sci 2008;14:147-55.
9. Villa A, Abati S, Pileri P, et al. Oral health and diseases in pregnancy: a multicentre survey of Italian postpartum women. Aust Dent J 2013;58:224-9.
10. Karabekiroglu S, Unlu N. Caries risk assessment -revıew. Dent J Dicle 2014;15:107-13.
11. Peres MA, Peres KG, de Barros AJ, et al. The relation between family socioeconomic trajectories from childhood to adolescence and dental caries and associated oral behaviours. J Epidemiol Community Health 2007;61:141-5.
12. Demirci M, Ozturk FC, Tuncer S, et al. The prevelance of indications on the patients who applied Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry department of conservative dentistry. J Istanbul Univ Fac Dent 2010;44:89-102.
13. Ince B, Bahsi E, Yavuz Y, et al. The evaluation of restorations of patients who treated at Dicle University Faculty of Dentistry: A retrospective study. Dent J Dicle 2015;16:168-72.
14. Karabekiroglu S, Unlu N. Evaluation of basic parameters of dental caries in young adults with high caries risk. J Dent Ege Univ 2014;35:26-31.
15. Namal N, Can G, Vehid S, et al. Dental health status and risk factors for dental caries in adults in Istanbul, Turkey. East Mediterr Health J 2008;14:110-4.
16. Incebeyaz B, Deniz HA, Polat E, et al. Evaluation of clinical status of first permanent molar teeth according to age and gender. J Dent Fac Ankara Uni 2019; 46:137-44.
17. Sert S, Ozcelik C Tunca YM, et al. The distribution of endotontically treated teeth in various age groups. Gulhane Med J 2003;45:249-55.
18. Yucel T, Bayırlı G, Ascı S, et al. Dental health in patients admitted to our outpatient clinic. J Istanbul Univ Fac Dent1982;16:309-17.
19. Cobankara FK, Orucoglu H. Investigation of root canal treatment incidence by age, gender and tooth groups. Cumhuriyet Dent J 2004;7:20-4.
20. Ucok, M, Kucukay S, Tarim B, et al. Distribution of endodontic treatments in different age groups by teeth. J Istanbul Univ Fac Dent 1988;22:21-32