View article

Aim.

To evaluate the use of different gingival displacement techniques among group of dental clinicians and the associated knowledge and technique preferences.

Methods.

A self-designed survey was created electronically and sent to a list of dentists. The survey was composed of multiple sections. Participants who stated that they do not use GD methods were asked to answer the survey questions based on their knowledge. Descriptive statistics were generated, and the Chi-square test was used to examine associations between the different variables.

Results.

A total of 188 dentists participated in this study. The majority (76.6%) use GD in their clinics. When asked which technique yields a more accurate impression and a lower incidence of repeating the impression, 64.6% reported that the technique is retraction cords with a hemostatic agent, and only 9.7% said it was retraction paste.

Conclusion.

The cordless GD technique is believed to be easier, faster, and less traumatic to the gingival tissues, nevertheless, the outcome of dental impressions is believed to be more predictable with the use of conventional retraction cords and hemostatic medicaments.