ÖMÜRLÜ, Hüma Gazi Üniversitesi - Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi - Restoratif Diş Tedavisi ve Endodonti Anabilim Dalı, Turkey , ARISU, Hacer DENİZ 2Gazi Üniversitesi - Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi - Restoratif Diş Tedavisi ve Endodonti Anabilim Dalı, Turkey , ELİGÜZELOĞLU, Evrim Yüzüncüyıl Üniversitesi - Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi - Restoratif Diş Tedavisi ve Endodonti Anabilim Dalı, Turkey , ÜÇTAŞLI, Mine Betül Gazi Üniversitesi - Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi - Restoratif Diş Tedavisi ve Endodonti Anabilim Dalı, Turkey , BALA, Oya Gazi Üniversitesi - Dis Hekimligi Fakültesi - Restoratif Diş Tedavisi ve Endodonti Anabilim Dalı, Turkey

EVALUATION OF THE CLINICAL SUCCESS OF DIRECT RESTORATIONS OF THE PATIENTSWHO APPLIED THE UNIVERSITY OF GAZI FACULTY OF DENTISTRY DEPARTMENT OF OPERATIVE DENTISTRY

26171

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the age, gender, education, frequency of going to dentist, diatery and oral hygine habbits of of patients who consulted our clinic for treatment and the clinical performance of direct restorations of these patients that had done in different treatment centers in Turkey. Material and Method: In this study age, gender, education, frequency of going to dentist, diatery and oral hygine habbits of 305 patients aged between 16 to 85 who consulted to Gazi University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics and the clinical performance of 612 restorations of these patients were evaluated according to the marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration and seconder caries occurance. The data were analysed statistically using Pearson chi-square test (p=0.05). Results: It was observed that 80.9 % amalgam (495 teeth) and 18.6 % esthetic restorative material (114 teeth) was used as restorative material. Evaluated restorations were done in 38.7% university student clinics, 28.6 % private clinics, 15.8 % public hospital, 9.3 % private dental clinics (57 teeth), 3.6 % university instructors clinics, 3.6%university clinics (unknown). There was a significant difference between restorative material and marginal discoloration (p=0.006), restorative material and seconder caries (p=0.004). Amalgam restorations showed the best results among restorative materials. There was a significat difference between treatment center and marginal adaptation (p=0.048), treatment center and marginal discoloration (p=0.000), treatment center and seconder caries (p=0.004). The best results were obtained from the restorations which was done in university clinics. Conclusion: In this study group the best results were obtained with amalgam restorations which were done in university clinics. Restorative material, treatment centers and age of restorations affect the clinical performance of conservative restorations.

23

Amalgam restoration , esthetic restorative materials , clinical success , restorations

Acta Odontologica Turcica

28