ArticleCureus2024
Knowledge and Practice of Endocrown Restorations Among Dental Students and Dentists in Sirte, Libya.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Restoring endodontically treated teeth has long posed a challenge for clinicians. The endocrown (EC) is an innovative and conservative restoration designed for teeth with severely damaged coronal structures. ECs offer performance that is equivalent to or even exceeds that of traditional post-core-crown treatments. Purpose This web-based cross-sectional survey aimed to evaluate the level of knowledge and practical experience regarding ECs as post-endodontic prostheses among dental students and practitioners in Libya. Methods A 22-item structured questionnaire was created using Google Forms and distributed to final-year students, interns, faculty at the College of Dentistry at Sirte University, and practicing dentists in Libya. The sample comprised 290 participants. The questionnaire was divided into three sections: the first assessed demographic variables such as gender, education level, country of graduation, and workplace; the second evaluated knowledge of ECs through 11 questions; and the third focused on EC practice, also comprising 11 questions. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0 (Released 2012; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results A total of 50.7% of participants indicated that EC restorations are suitable for molar teeth, 41.4% noted that a butt joint finish line is used for EC preparation, and 66.9% preferred all-ceramic materials for ECs. Nearly 72.8% reported that computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing technology is employed for EC fabrication. Additionally, 61.7% agreed that EC designs offer higher fracture resistance compared to conventional crowns. Despite this, 64.5% of participants had not cemented an EC in their clinic in recent years. Significant differences in knowledge and practice regarding ECs were observed across various factors, including gender, education level, country of graduation, and workplace. Conclusion Most participants demonstrated an acceptable level of knowledge and practical experience with EC restorations. Therefore, incorporating ECs as a major topic in the postgraduate prosthodontics curriculum is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.