No abstract

For procedures involving GA, consent is more likely to be informed. For routine care, a more structured approach is required and Pakistani parents in particular need more support. A third of all parents (routine and GA group) felt that they had not been involved in the final treatment decision.

Objective To identify the outcomes of primary molars treated for two surface dental caries. Design A review was undertaken using clinical notes from two Personal Dental Service (PDS) clinics in Bradford. Data was abstracted from the notes of children deemed eligible for inclusion in the study. Results The majority of primary molar teeth considered in the study were restored with amalgam (45.7%). One in six teeth (15%) was restored with glass ionomer and 7.2 per cent of teeth were restored with stainless steel crowns. Overall, half of the primary molar teeth restored with amalgam (50%) required further treatment following initial placement of the restoration and one in four of these teeth (25%) went on to be extracted. A similar picture emerged when teeth restored with glass ionomer were considered. For the small number ofteeth restored with stainless steel crowns, there was a 90 per cent success rate, with only two teeth requiring extraction. Conclusions Amalgam remains the most commonly used material for the restoration of primary molars presenting with two surface caries. Glass ionomer is less popular and stainless steel crowns are infrequently selected as the initial treatment of choice for such teeth. When the outcomes were considered for teeth restored with the different materials, the audit showed that stainless steel crowns were more effective than plastic restorative materials.