RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: With increasing life expectancy and improved preventive measures, teeth are retained longer, leading to a rise in prevalence of root caries lesions (RCL). However, little is known about how dentists manage this condition. The present survey aimed to evaluate the knowledge of Swiss dentists on decision making and management of RCL. METHOD: The survey evaluated dentists' knowledge, clinical routines, and demographics concerning RCL. Dentists were contacted via email and local newsletters, and 383 dentists from 25 (out of 26) cantons responded. Mann-Whitney U test, χ2 test, intraclass correlation coefficients, Spearman correlation and Chi Square were used. RESULTS: The dentists had a mean(SD) working experience of 22.5(12) years. Most dentists correctly classified an inactive (67%) and an active (81%)RCL. Although the inactive lesion did not call for restorative treatments, 61% of the dentist declared they would restore it. From the active lesion,83% would restore it. The invasive treatments leaned toward complete caries excavation with composite resin as preferred restorative material. There were significant correlations between material choice and expected success rates. Among the non-invasive options, oral hygiene instructions and (highly-)fluoridated toothpaste were favored. Most dentists declared having a recall system for such patients, with biannual follow-ups preferred. The dentists' place of education significantly influenced restorative decisions (p < 0.001), while participants' age (≥60years) impacted activity status (p = 0.048) and restorative decisions (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Material preferences for non-invasive or invasive management varied greatly and there were minimal differences in the management of inactive or an active RCL. Moreover, diagnosing active lesions appeared easier than diagnosing inactive ones. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Despite diverse material preferences for (non-)invasive treatments, a strong positive correlation existed between the chosen restorative material and its expected 2-year success rate. Moreover, diagnosing active lesions appeared easier than diagnosing inactive ones. The outcome emphasis the need to align guideline recommendations with their application in private dental practices.