Table 4.
Clinical case scenarios regarding MIH management and the responses of the study participants
| Question | GDPs N = 115 N (%) |
Paediatric Dentists N = 41 N (%) |
Other Dental Specialists N = 65 N (%) |
X 2 | P value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CASE 1: 7 year old child with severely MIH affected tooth #16 and post eruptive breakdown | ||||||||
| PMCs | 74 | (64.3) b | 34 | (82.9) b | 32 | (49.2) a | 17.242 | 0.028* |
| Composite restoration & fissure sealant | 23 | (20.0) b | 2 | (5.0) a | 19 | (29.2) b | ||
| GI restoration | 11 | (9.6) | 3 | (7.3) | 5 | (7.7) | ||
| Extraction | 3 | (2.6) | 1 | (2.4) | 2 | (3.1) | ||
| Not sure what to do | 4 | (3.5) | 1 | (2.4) | 7 | (10.8) | ||
| CASE 2: 6 year old child with moderate MIH on tooth #16 | ||||||||
| PMCs | 23 | (20.0) b | 10 | (24.4) b | 4 | (6.2) a | 28.294 | .002* |
| Composite restoration | 55 | (47.8) b | 19 | (46.3) b | 18 | (27.7) a | ||
| Fissure sealant | 13 | (11.3) | 1 | (2.4) | 14 | (21.5) | ||
| GI restoration | 20 | (14.4) | 9 | (22.0) | 21 | (32.3) | ||
| Extraction | 1 | (0.9) | 0 | (0.0) | 1 | (1.5) | ||
| Not sure what to do | 3 | (2.6) | 2 | (4.9) | 7 | (10.8) | ||
| CASE 3: 9 year old child with mild MIH affecting tooth #11 | ||||||||
| Microabrasion | 29 | (25.2) | 9 | (22.0) | 11 | (16.9) | 13.646 | 0.034* |
| Etch, bleach, and seal with low viscosity resin (ICON ®) | 29 | (25.2) a | 19 | (46.3) b | 30 | (46.2) b | ||
| Remove MIH affected area and restore with resin | 49 | (42.6) | 11 | (26.8) | 17 | (26.2) | ||
| Not sure what to do | 8 | (7) | 2 | (4.9) | 7 | (10.8) | ||
* p < 0.05 = significant difference
a-b values within rows with different superscript letters are significantly different (P < 0.05) using post hoc test