Mayinger Felicitas, Lankes Valerie, Roos Malgorzata, Rohr Nadja, Ioannidis Alexis, Elsayed Adham, Güth Jan-Frederik, Edelhoff Daniel, Passia Nicole, Esmail Iman, Beuer Florian, Wolfart Stefan, Spies Benedikt Christopher, Schimmel Martin, Abou-Ayash Samir, Hahnel Sebastian, Schlenz Maximiliane Amelie, Frankenberger Roland, Blunck Uwe, Kraus Dominik, Engelschalk Marcus, Huettig Fabian, Kern Matthias, Luehrs Anne-Katrin, Gierthmuehlen Petra C, Stawarczyk Bogna
J Adhes Dent. 2025 Jun 19;27:123-136. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.c_2106.
To investigate, via questionnaire, how protocols for adhesive luting workflows of dental restorations are applied in three German-speaking countries.
A 47-item questionnaire gathered data on airborne particle abrasion (APA) unit characteristics, parameters, operating procedures, pretreatments in adhesive luting workflows for restorations, and participant demographics. The survey was distributed via trade journals, expert associations, universities, technical schools, and social media. Marginal absolute and relative frequencies were analyzed (95% confidence intervals), with Chi-squared tests comparing observed and expected frequencies (P0.05). Twenty-three experts voted on 23 recommendations regarding APA parameters and other pretreatments for bonding restorations.
A total of 267 participants completed the survey. Access to an APA unit was linked to a higher likelihood of performing APA before placement. Approximately half of the participants used APA in their practice. For zirconia restorations, 47.2% applied alumina APA at 50 µm/0.1 MPa, while 36.7% used the same settings for polymer-based restorations. For alloys, 37.5% employed 110 µm/0.2 MPa. These preferences correlated with age (≥30 years), experience (≥10 years), profession (dental technician/dentist), prior instruction/training, and daily APA use. Adhesives with MDP were used for zirconia (63.8%) and those with silane for silicate-based ceramics (55.9%). Agreement on recommendations ranged between 52% and 100%, with 21/23 reaching an average of 93%.
Access to APA influenced clinical decisions and the feasibility of adhesive luting workflows. Adequate APA equipment in dental facilities is essential for quality care. Standardized protocols, training, and education across dental professions are necessary to enhance understanding and proper use of APA.
通过问卷调查，研究德语区三个国家如何应用牙齿修复体粘结流程的方案。
一份包含47个条目的问卷收集了关于空气颗粒磨损（APA）设备特性、参数、操作程序、修复体粘结流程中的预处理以及参与者人口统计学数据。该调查通过行业期刊、专家协会、大学、技术学校和社交媒体进行分发。分析了边际绝对频率和相对频率（95%置信区间），并使用卡方检验比较观察频率和预期频率（P<0.05）。23位专家对23条关于APA参数和其他修复体粘结预处理的建议进行了投票。
共有267名参与者完成了调查。能够使用APA设备与在修复体就位前进行APA操作的可能性更高相关。大约一半的参与者在实践中使用APA。对于氧化锆修复体，47.2%在50 µm/0.1 MPa下应用氧化铝APA，而36.7%对聚合物基修复体使用相同设置。对于合金，37.5%采用110 µm/0.2 MPa。这些偏好与年龄（≥30岁）、经验（≥10年）、职业（牙科技师/牙医）、先前的指导/培训以及每日APA使用情况相关。含MDP的粘结剂用于氧化锆修复体（63.8%），含硅烷的粘结剂用于硅酸盐基陶瓷修复体（55.9%）。对建议的认同度在52%至100%之间，21/23条建议平均认同度达到93%。
能否使用APA影响了临床决策和粘结流程的可行性。牙科机构配备足够的APA设备对于优质护理至关重要。牙科各专业之间需要标准化的方案、培训和教育，以加强对APA的理解和正确使用。
