AwAreness-knowledge level And prActice of two dentistry speciAlties dentists regArding juxtA-ApicAl rAdiolucency


Creative Commons License

BAĞCI N., PAMUKÇU U., TOPRAK M. E., PEKER İ.

Journal of Stomatology, cilt.77, sa.1, ss.55-62, 2024 (Scopus) identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 77 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.5114/jos.2024.136151
  • Dergi Adı: Journal of Stomatology
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Scopus
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.55-62
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: juxtaapical radiolucency, panoramic radiography, third molar
  • Gazi Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Introduction: Mandibular third molar extraction is one of the most common procedures in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The procedure may result in several complications, such as injury of inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) and postoperative paresthesia/dysesthesia. Objectives: To evaluate the awarenessknowledge level and practice of dentists who received specialization training in oral and maxillofacial radiology and oral and maxillofacial surgery regarding juxtaapical radiolucency (JAR). Material and methods: Dentist participants who received specialization training and volunteered to participate were divided into two groups according to their specialization: group 1 – oral and maxillofacial radiology; group 2 – oral and maxillofacial surgery. A special questionnaire was prepared for this study and participants provided answers facetoface. The form consisted of two parts: part 1 – personal information, and part 2 – awarenessknowledge level and practice regarding JAR. In part 2, dentists were asked questions on different panoramic radiography images containing JAR in a slide show. Pearson’s c2 test was applied for statistical analysis. Results: A total of 66 volunteers divided into two groups [group 1: n = 32 (43%); group 2: n = 34 (57%)] participated in the current study. The preliminary diagnosis of JAR was mostly associated with anatomical formation (group 1: 63.1%; group 2: 64.1%) and odontogenic/nonodontogenic lesions (group 1: 41.8%; group 2: 48.2%). Usually, participants thought that such a radiolucency would affect extraction method (group 1: 68.8%; group 2: 63.5%), posed a risk for IAN (group 1: 67.5%; group 2: 69.4%), and negatively affect healing process (group 1: 66.3%; group 2: 61.2%). A small ratio of participants was aware of JAR (group 1: 18.8%; group 2: 2.9%). Conclusions: The awarenessknowledge level of dentists who received training in oral and maxillofacial radiology and oral and maxillofacial surgery regarding JAR was low. The practice of participants of both specialties towards JAR were variable.