Journal of Dental Medicine

Background and Aims: Endocrown is a type of monoblock restoration using the pulp chamber and remaining coronal tooth structure for retention. Advancements in adhesive techniques have breathed fresh spirit into endocrown. Nowadays, there are two approaches for endocrown: conventional approach and  biomimetic approach. This study aimed to review data on the steps and clinical and philosophical points of using these approaches to help dentists’ selection and performance.
Materials and Methods: The review was conducted by reviewing the articles available in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases from 1995 to 2022. The keywords used were; Crown, Endodontically-treated teeth, Light-curing of dental adhesive, Onlay, and Post-Core.  
Results: After removing duplicates, titles/abstracts were reviewed. Animal studies, studies without available full text or non-English language studies were excluded from the study. Then, the full texts of the remaining 59 articles were evaluated and 49 articles were eligible for the present study. The articles included clinical trials, in vitro, systematic reviews, and case reports.
Conclusion: Endocrown is a successful alternative to crown, especially in molar teeth. Regardless of the conventional or biomimetic approach, this treatment has a more favorable fracture pattern while preserving the remaining tooth tissue as much as possible.

Background and Aims: The development and regular use of adhesive systems has started to revolutionize many aspects of restorative and preventive dentistry. The success of adhesive restorations highly depends on correct application of them. Therefore, the present study was conducted with the aim of determining the knowledge of dentists in Rafsanjan city (Iran) in choosing correct dental adhesive systems in 2023.
Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, all dentists working in Rafsanjan city were included. The data was collected by a valid and reliable electronic questionnaire, which included two parts of demographic information (gender, age, place of work and year of graduation) and the 12 multiple-choice questions aimed to assess respondents' knowledge regarding the selection of dental adhesive materials in combination with self-cure or dual-cure composites, anterior and posterior composite restorations, fiber posts, fissure sealants, primary teeth, anterior composite veneers, ceramic laminates, and non-carious cervical lesions. The scoring of this questionnaire was as follows: 0 to 3 correct answers = Low level of knowledge; 4 to 6 correct answers = Moderate level of knowledge; 7 to 9 correct answers = Good level of knowledge; 10 to 12 correct answers = Very good level of knowledge.  The four answer choices included "etch-and-rinse (three-step)", "etch-and-rinse (two-step)", "self-etch (two-step)", and "self-etch (all-in-one bottle)". Then data were analyzed by parametric tests (ANOVA, t-test, and Pearson). The significant level was considered as P<0.05.
Results: Out of 91 dentists in Rafsanjan, 79 (86.8%) participated in the study, of which 35 (46.3%) were men. The average work experience was 3.49±3.96 years for men and 2.98±3.73 years for women. The average knowledge score was 4.38±2.16 out of 12 (4.29±2.23 in men and 4.45±2.12 in women). The results showed that there was no significant relationship between the knowledge score and the gender, age, work experience, and workplace (P>0.05).
Conclusion: According to the results which indicated the insufficient knowledge of dentists in  choosing correct dental adhesive systems, it is suggested to pay more attention on teaching in this field at the dental schools. For graduate dentists, new and practical information about the choice of adhesive systems should be provided by continuous education programs.