Decision making process by senior residents of Saudi Board in restorative dentistry for nonsurgical endodontic retreatment: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Despite the general guidelines for retreatment, differences in decision making exist for secondary endodontic treatment and may be related to many factors including education, clinical experience, dentist specialty, patient preferences and economic resources. Aim of the study was to evaluate the decision making of the Saudi Board in Restorative Dentistry (SBRD) senior residents in the endodontic retreatment of molar teeth as per the scientific guidelines of the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) and also to identify the causes of retreatment and measure how far they become deviated from their taught retreatment principles and inter-individual variability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Case histories have been obtained from the files of cases treated in the SBRD Resident Comprehensive Case Archives in the SCHS from 2003 to 2015 in Riyadh region. The cases were only confined to Complex I and Complex II cases according to RDITN (Restorative Dental Index of Treatment Need), and seen by R3 and R4 residents only. Residents’ diagnosis was recorded as well as their treatment plan and any given notes regarding their decisions to retreat. Differences between the two groups (R3 and R4) residents and within the same group, regarding endodontic retreatment decisions and reasons for their treatment options were analyzed using Chi-Square test and Fisher’s Exact test. RESULTS: The majority of residents in both R4 and R3 groups followed the recommended guidelines. R3 residents preferred to retreat all cases while R4 chose ‘no to retreat’ in few cases. Although R4 residents preferred nonsurgical retreatment more than R3 residents, the difference was insignificant. R4 residents preferred ‘no therapy’ or ‘follow up’ more frequent than R3 residents. Members of the R3 residents agreed more or less with each other as did those of the R4 residents without significant inter-individual variations within each group regarding the choice of retreatment). CONCLUSIONS: R4 residents appeared more likely, although not significant, to choose no retreatment or follow up than R3 residents. Conventional nonsurgical retreatment had the highest selection by both R3 and R4 residents. No significant inter-individual variations within each group regarding the choice of retreatment. There is a need to establish evidence based guidelines for more uniform management of failed root treated teeth.