Dentists’ Knowledge and Treatment Preferences on Dental Erosive Lesions in Southern India: Implications for Policy and Education
TL;DR
Dentists in Southern India exhibited a reasonable level of DE awareness, but the need for clinical guidelines on erosive tooth wear and ongoing professional education is highlighted by the lower use of standardized indices and discrepancies in clinical management.
Abstract
Background Early diagnosis and proper treatment are essential for dental erosion (DE), a condition that is gaining more recognition in recent years. This study surveyed dentists in Southern India to assess their knowledge of DE, diagnostic approaches, and treatment preferences. Methods We used a self‐administered questionnaire (n = 110) aimed at assessing demographics, frequency of DE encounter, perceived prevalence trends, etiological understanding, preventive advice, and preferred treatments. Descriptive statistics, chi‐square test of association, multivariate logistic regressions, and clustering analysis were conducted. Results The sample consisted of 71% females and mean age of 31.46 ± 4.29 years, had predominantly learned about DE in dental schools (85%). Upper incisors were identified as most frequently affected teeth (72%). Most of the preventive counseling focused on reducing acidic intake (58%). No significant association was found between the years of experience and frequency of DE cases seen (p = 0.68). Multinomial regression of treatment choices indicated that specialists pursued invasive restorations like ceramic veneers odds ratio (OR) = 5.42 (95% CI: ~1.23−24.0, p = 0.025) or crowns (95% CI: ~1.12−14.3, p = 0.034) more than the general dentists, whereas higher years of experience was associated with a lower probability of choosing mid‐level restorative options (p < 0.05). Clustering analysis revealed three practitioner profiles: (1) an “Aggressive/Referral” cluster of mostly younger dentists who frequently planned crowns and referred cases frequently (67% referral rate), (2) a “Conservative/Preventive” cluster of more experienced general dentists who emphasized monitoring and dietary advice with minimal operative interventions and infrequent referrals, and (3) an “Intermediate” cluster who implemented modern practices like index usage but also held more misconceptions. Conclusion Dentists in Southern India exhibited a reasonable level of DE awareness. The need for clinical guidelines on erosive tooth wear and ongoing professional education is highlighted by the lower use of standardized indices and discrepancies in clinical management. Training in early detection, cause‐specific management of DE, and debunking myths will be necessary to improve patient outcomes in this developing field of dental care.