Methods: A 22 item questionnaire on DH was sent to a representative sample of 2200 Dentists and Dental Hygienists/Therapists (DH/T).
Results: 346 Questionnaires were returned (15.7%), 142 Questionnaires were from dentists (12.9%) and 204 Questionnaires were from DH/T (18.5%). The majority of dentists reported that the percentage of patients with DH ranged between 5%-15% whereas most DH/T reported that 15% to 50% of patients complained of DH. Regarding the severity of DH, dentists reported that only 1-5% of patients considered the condition to be serious whereas DH/T reported that only 3-10% of their patients considered DH to be serious. The majority of dentists (32.8%) and 37.9% of DH/T indicated that DH lasted >12 weeks. Dentists (44.7%) and DH/T (66.3%) also indicated that DH had a major impact on the quality of life (QOL) with 64.1% (dentists) and 63.4% (DH/T) indicating that the impact was moderate in nature. Of the commonly recognised aetiological features associated with DH, 39.4% of dentists and 42.2% of DH/T considered abrasion to be a major cause of DH; with gingival recession (35.2% [dentists] and 40.7% [DH/T]), incorrect brushing technique 39.4% [dentists] and 39.7%, [DH/T], erosion 28.9% [dentists] and 26% [DHT] as alternative causes. 65.8% dentists and 61.8% of DHT correctly identified the hydrodynamic theory as the accepted theory of DH. 47.8% [dentists] and 45.9% [DH/T] reported that they were confident to diagnose DH whereas 55.6% [DH/T] reported that they were very confident in treating DH compared to dentists [35.7%].
Conclusions: The results of the present study would appear to suggest that in terms of knowledge and understanding of DH there is still confusion concerning some aspects of the diagnosis and management of the condition.