Irrigation trends among members of the Chilean Endodontic Society

Introduction: the aim of this study is to determine the current trends of irrigation during root canal therapy by specialists who are members of the Chilean Endodontic Society. materials and method: a survey (survey monkey -SurveyMonkey.com) was e-mailed to the 485 members of the Chilean Endodontic Society. the instrument was translated and adapted from the survey "irrigation trends among American Association of Endodontists members: a web-based survey" applied in the USA in 2012. participants answered a set of 16 questions that included irrigant selection, irrigant concentration, the adopted protocol, techniques or devices for irrigant activation. results: 99 percent of respondents use sodium hypochlorite as the main irrigant. data indicate that 74 percent of respondents use hypochlorite at a concentration of 5 percent. most respondents (94 percent) also include EDTA in their usual practice. In addition, 90 percent of respondents reported that they activate the irrigating agent, and 94 percent confirmed that they perform a final irrigation protocol. conclusion: the majority of respondents use sodium hypochlorite as the main irrigant at a concentration of 5 percent, use ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as a smear removal agent, activate the irrigant, and perform a final irrigation protocol.

Irrigation trends among American Association of Endodontists members: a web-based survey.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine current trends in irrigation selection among endodontists. METHODS: An invitation to participate in a web-based survey (QuestionPro) was e-mailed to 3844 members of the American Association of Endodontists. Survey participants were asked between 10 and 14 questions based on their individual responses. Among other questions, participants were asked about their irrigant selection, irrigant concentration, smear layer removal, and use of adjuncts to irrigation. RESULTS: A total of 3707 survey invitations were successfully delivered by e-mail after accounting for several undeliverable e-mail invitations. There were 1102 participants, with an overall completion rate of 28.5% (n = 1054). Our data indicate that >90% of respondents primarily use sodium hypochlorite, with 57% of them using it at a concentration >5.0%. Seventy-seven percent of respondents aim to remove the smear layer during endodontic treatment. At least 45% of respondents reported using an adjunct to irrigation. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the respondents are using full-strength sodium hypochlorite and are routinely removing the smear layer during endodontic treatment. In addition, almost half of the respondents are using an adjunct, such as ultrasonic activation, to aid in their irrigation technique.

A survey of sodium hypochlorite use by general dental practitioners and endodontists in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Sodium hypochlorite is used commonly as an endodontic irrigant, but there are no published reports that provide details of its use. This survey sought to determine the percentage of Australian dentists who practiced endodontics, whether they used sodium hypochlorite for irrigation, and the manner of dilution, storage and dispensing sodium hypochlorite used by both dentists and endodontists. METHODS: All Australian endodontists and a stratified random sample of 200 general dentists in Australia were surveyed to address the issues identified above. RESULTS: Almost 98 per cent of dentists surveyed performed endodontic treatment. Among endodontists, nearly 94 per cent used sodium hypochlorite for irrigation compared with just under 75 per cent of general dentists. Sodium hypochlorite use by general dentists was more common in Victoria and South Australia than in other States. An infant sanitizer (Milton or Johnson's Antibacterial Solution) was used by just over 92 per cent of general practitioners and by more than 67 per cent of endodontists. All other respondents used domestic bleach. One hundred and sixty four of the respondents (80 per cent of endodontists and over 90 per cent of general dentists) used a 1 per cent w/v solution. Ten practitioners used a 4 per cent w/v solution, five used a 2 per cent w/v solution and four used a 1.5 per cent w/v solution. Eighty per cent of the practitioners who diluted their sodium hypochlorite before use, used demineralized water for this purpose. The remainder used tap water. Only four practitioners stored sodium hypochlorite in a manner which risked light exposure and loss of available chlorine content. CONCLUSIONS: Sodium hypochlorite is commonly used as an endodontic irrigant and Australian dentists generally stored the material correctly.