Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices ofGeneral Dental Practitioners RegardingComposite Resin Restorations inSaudi Arabia

Abstract

Introduction: Composite resin restorations are widely used for restoring permanent teeth due to their esthetic
properties and conservative preparation. However, variations in clinical preferences and awareness among dentists
and dental students, driven by training, experience, perceived longevity, cost, and technique sensitivity, may
affect treatment choices and patient outcomes. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the level of awareness,
attitudes, and clinical preferences of practicing dentists and dental students regarding the use of composite resin
restorations for permanent teeth, and to identify practitioner- and practice-level factors associated with those
preferences. Methodology: This cross-sectional study surveyed licensed dental students, general dentists and
restorative specialists. The instrument covered demographics (age, years of practice, and specialty), knowledge
(indications, material properties, and bonding protocols), attitudes (confidence and perceived longevity), and
reported clinical preferences (choice of material for Class I–V restorations, posterior vs. anterior use, adhesive
protocols). Items used Likert scales and multiple-choice questions; pilot testing was used to assess validity and
reliability. Descriptive statistics summarized awareness and preference patterns. Associations between preferences
and predictors (e.g., years in practice, specialty, and continuing education attendance) were tested using Chisquare tests and multivariable logistic regression; significance set at P < 0.05. Results: The study included 429
respondents. Females represented 58.7%; 45.5% were ≤25 years, and participants were mainly clinical students
(41.0%) and general practitioners (40.6%). Most respondents reported being aware of composite resin properties
very well (71.1%) and had encountered composite resin in clinical practice (62.7%). Awareness of failure causes
was generally moderate, but secondary caries showed the lowest awareness (mean 2.99/5), with 34.3% rating low
awareness (≤2), whereas post-operative sensitivity had the highest mean awareness (3.37/5) and 42.9% rating
4–5. Regarding determinants of longevity, 82.1% believed multi-surface cavities fail more, and 87.6% indicated
oral hygiene has a significant impact; 54.5% believed age affects success. For study-based statements, 39.9%
selected all correct options and 9.6% reported
not knowing. Practice and perception items
showed that 50.6% placed ≥3 composite
restorations weekly; in follow-up scenarios,
38.5% considered plaque accumulation
more acceptable than marginal discoloration,
whereas 39.9% selected neither; 85.8% strongly
endorsed integrating oral-hygiene instruction
and risk-factor management into composite
education. Using the predefined scoring system,
high proficiency was observed in awareness of
composite resin (42.4%), but low proficiency predominated for failure-cause awareness (54.1%) and for practice/professional perception (44.8%). Conclusion: Overall,
39.4% were categorized as low, 40.8% moderate, and 19.8% high (mean total score 23.0 ± 5.9; range 11.5–35.5). The overall
score category was significantly associated with gender, age group, professional status, residential region, and institution type,
but not nationality or recent continuing education. These findings indicate strong baseline familiarity with composites but
important gaps in failure-related knowledge and practice-oriented decision-making