METHODS: A comprehensive analysis was undertaken on the most common, existing classification for root canal morphology. The advantages and potential applications of a new system for classifying roots and canal systems in research and clinical practice are discussed.
RESULTS: The analysis demonstrates deficiencies of the existing classification including lack of information on the number of roots, pulp chamber outline, lack of clarity in multi-rooted teeth, inability to define complex root canal configurations. The new coding system addresses the root and canal morphology in an accurate and systematic manner to provide detailed information of the tooth, root and canal anatomical features.
CONCLUSION: With current advances in endodontic research and practice and the increasing body of knowledge on root and canal morphology, the deficiencies of the existing system used for classifying root canal morphology have become more apparent. The new system for classifying root, main and accessory canal morphology as well as teeth with anomalies has the potential to be used in research, clinical practice and education to accurately reflect the real anatomy of a tooth.
METHODOLOGY: Cross-sectional study was conducted at 13 hospitals and 44 primary health clinics in Perak from May to July 2017. Adults above 18 years, literate, and had experience in antibiotics consumption were selected through sequential sampling method. Data was collected using a self-administered questionnaire which included the three study domains i.e. belief, knowledge and practice. The questionnaire was pilot on 30 subjects.
RESULTS: Out of 2850 distributed questionnaires, 2773 returned and 2632 were included for analysis. Mean age of the respondents was 39.7 ± 14.5 years old. Most respondents were female (58.6%), Malay (74.7%) and underwent upper secondary school (45.6%). Mean score were generated for each domain with belief: 5.87 ± 3.00 (total score: 12), knowledge: 15.82 ± 3.85 (total score: 24), practice: 6.91 ± 2.07 (total score: 12). In the belief domain, 63.2% of respondents believed that antibiotics would help them to recover faster. In the knowledge domain, 52.7% of respondents inappropriately thought that antibiotics could work on viral infections. In the practice domain, 70% of respondents expected doctors to prescribe antibiotics if suffered from symptoms.
CONCLUSION: Majority of the respondents expect doctors to prescribe antibiotics for their illness, and most believes that antibiotics can speed up recovery of illness. Lack of awareness on antibiotic resistance was found to be a significant factor associated with inappropriate antibiotic use.