The aim of this study was to obtain information on the restorative dental care of adults in Finland. A random sample of private dentists was drawn from the register, and in spring 2000 they were sent a questionnaire requesting them to record information for each restoration placed during one ordinary working day. A total of 800 dentists were contacted and 548 responded. The dentists reported placement of 3,455 restorations. Of these, 5% were Class I, 36% were Class II, 13% were Class III, 9% were Class IV, 21% were Class V, and 16% were extensive restorations including 4 or more surfaces. Overall, composite resin was the most common restorative material, and it was used in 79% of the restorations, whereas amalgam was used in 50%, compomers in 4%, and glass ionomers (either conventional or resin-modified) in 7% of cases. In 5%, of the cases, the tooth was restored with indirect restorative methods, using either gold or ceramic materials. Of the treatments, 65% were replacements of previous restorations. Secondary caries was the most common reason for replacement (36%, 52%, and 41% for composite, glass ionomer, and amalgam, respectively). Other common reasons were fractures of the tooth or restoration (23%, 11%, and 22% for composite, glass ionomer, and amalgam, respectively) and lost composite restorations (16%). The median age of failed restorations was 15 years for amalgam, 6 years for composite, and 7 years for conventional glass ionomer. Although the longevity of tooth coloured restorations was shorter than that of amalgam, comparisons with our previous studies indicate improved survival periods for tooth coloured materials.

Self-reported oral health behaviours seemed to be very different between the two countries, which reflected different culture and/or health education systems of the students.

No abstract

During the 2004 annual meeting of the International Association for Dental Research, the Education Research Group held a symposium on dental outreach teaching. After a brief introduction, which reviews relevant aspects of the relatively sparse literature, this paper summarises the proceedings, the themes and conclusions that emerged and the research issues that were identified. It aims to describe aspects of current practice around the world and to promote future discussion. Presenters gave details of outreach programmes for dental undergraduates in Australia, Finland, Malaysia (and Southeast Asia), the United Kingdom and the United States. From these presentations four themes emerged. They were: reasons for the introduction of outreach teaching, its perceived beneficial effects, organisational issues, educational issues. The reasons included a recognition of the need to educate dental undergraduates as members of 'care teams' in the environments and communities where they were ultimately like to work and the current shortage of both suitable patients and teachers (faculty) in many dental schools. A wide range of potential benefits and some disadvantages were identified. The organisational issues were, in the main, seen to relate to finance and administration. The educational issues included the need to train and monitor the performance of teachers at outreach clinics and to assess the performance of the undergraduates whilst at the outreach locations. It was concluded that new technology made it easier to teach at a distance and it was possible to create a dental 'school without walls'. It was recognised that few evaluations of dental outreach teaching have been carried out and that there were many research questions to be answered, including: whether it should be a voluntary or compulsory part of the undergraduate curriculum, how long it should last and what type of outcomes should be assessed.

The aim of this study was to obtain information on restorative dental care in Finland and to analyze the changes in treatment over a 5-year period. A random sample of dentists was drawn from the registers of the health authorities and the dental association in Finland, and in the spring of 1997 a questionnaire was sent requesting the dentists to record information for each restoration placed during a given period. A total of 1,229 dentists were contacted, and 659 responded. The dentists treated 5,305 adults during the study period and placed 6,322 restorations. The most common restorative material was composite resin, which was used in 74.9% of the restorations, whereas amalgam was used in 4.8% and glass ionomers in 9.4% of the restorations. The median ages of failed restorations were nearly 12 years for amalgam, slightly less than 5 years for composite, and slightly more than 4 years for glass ionomer. The results indicate that clinical dentistry in Finland has made a definite step towards the post-amalgam era. However, the functional periods of the failed tooth-colored restorations were disappointingly short and warrant some serious consideration.