Research ArticleOriginal Article
Open Access

Phase down of amalgam

Awareness of Minamata convention among Jordanian dentists

Mohammad A. AL-Rabab’ah, Mohammad A. Bustani, Ameen S. Khraisat and Faleh A. Sawair
Saudi Medical Journal December 2016, 37 (12) 1381-1386; DOI: https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2016.12.16163

References

  1. ↵
    1. United Nations Environment Programme
    (2013) Minamata Convention (United Nations Environment Programme, Kumamoto (JP)).
  2. ↵
    1. FDI World Dental Federation
    (2014) FDI policy statement on dental amalgam and the Minamata Convention on Mercury: adopted by the FDI General Assembly:13 September 2014, New Delhi, India. Int Dent J 64:295–296.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Kessler R
    (2013) The Minamata Convention on Mercury: a first step toward protecting future generations. Environ Health Perspect 121:A304–309.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    1. Mackey TK,
    2. Contreras JT,
    3. Liang BA
    (2014) The Minamata Convention on Mercury: attempting to address the global controversy of dental amalgam use and mercury waste disposal. Sci Total Environ 472:125–129.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Guerrieri A,
    2. Gaucher C,
    3. Bonte E,
    4. Lasfargues JJ
    (2012) Minimal intervention dentistry: part 4. Detection and diagnosis of initial caries lesions. Br Dent J 213:551–557.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Holmgren C,
    2. Gaucher C,
    3. Decerle N,
    4. Domejean S
    (2014) Minimal intervention dentistry II: part 3. Management of non-cavitated (initial) occlusal caries lesions: non-invasive approaches through remineralisation and therapeutic sealants. Br Dent J 216:237–243.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Lynch CD,
    2. Wilson NH
    (2013) Managing the phase-down of amalgam: part II. Implications for practising arrangements and lessons from Norway. Br Dent J 215:159–162.
    OpenUrl
    1. Lynch CD,
    2. Wilson NH
    (2013) Managing the phase-down of amalgam: Part I. Educational and training issues. Br Dent J 215:109–113.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Kielbassa AM,
    2. Lynch CD,
    3. Wilson NH
    (2014) Editorial: the Minamata Convention: the beginning of the (amalgam-free) future? Quintessence Int 45:547–548.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Lynch CD,
    2. Frazier KB,
    3. McConnell RJ,
    4. Blum IR,
    5. Wilson NH
    (2010) State-of-the-art techniques in operative dentistry: contemporary teaching of posterior composites in UK and Irish dental schools. Br Dent J 209:129–136.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Lynch CD,
    2. Frazier KB,
    3. McConnell RJ,
    4. Blum IR,
    5. Wilson NH
    (2011) Minimally invasive management of dental caries: contemporary teaching of posterior resin-based composite placement in U.S. and Canadian dental schools. J Am Dent Assoc 142:612–620.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Rey R,
    2. Nimmo S,
    3. Childs GS,
    4. Behar-Horenstein LS
    (2015) Curriculum time compared to clinical procedures in amalgam and composite posterior restorations in U.S. dental schools: a preliminary study. J Dent Educ 79:331–336.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Warwick R,
    2. O’Connor A,
    3. Lamey B
    (2013) Mercury vapour exposure during dental student training in amalgam removal. J Occup Med Toxicol 8:27.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Richardson GM,
    2. Wilson R,
    3. Allard D,
    4. Purtill C,
    5. Douma S,
    6. Graviere J
    (2011) Mercury exposure and risks from dental amalgam in the US population, post-2000. Sci Total Environ 409:4257–4268.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Decup F,
    2. Lasfargues JJ
    (2014) Minimal intervention dentistry II: part 4. Minimal intervention techniques of preparation and adhesive restorations. The contribution of the sono-abrasive techniques. Br Dent J 216:393–400.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Rasines Alcaraz MG,
    2. Veitz-Keenan A,
    3. Sahrmann P,
    4. Schmidlin PR,
    5. Davis D,
    6. Iheozor-Ejiofor Z
    (2014) Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent or adult posterior teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 3CD005620.
  17. ↵
    1. Farrugia C,
    2. Camilleri J
    (2015) Antimicrobial properties of conventional restorative filling materials and advances in antimicrobial properties of composite resins and glass ionomer cements: A literature review. Dent Mater 31(4):e89–99, 10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.005.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Sawair FA,
    2. Hassoneh Y,
    3. Jamleh AO,
    4. Al-Rabab’ah M
    (2010) Observance of proper mercury hygiene practices by Jordanian general dental practitioners. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 23:47–54.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Brunton PA,
    2. Burke FJ,
    3. Sharif MO,
    4. Creanor S,
    5. Hosey MT,
    6. Mannocci F,
    7. et al.
    (2012) Contemporary dental practice in the UK in 2008: aspects of direct restorations, endodontics and bleaching. Br Dent J 212:63–67.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Opdam NJ,
    2. van de Sande FH,
    3. Bronkhorst E,
    4. Cenci MS,
    5. Bottenberg P,
    6. Pallesen U,
    7. et al.
    (2014) Longevity of posterior composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res 93:943–949.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Lempel E,
    2. Toth A,
    3. Fabian T,
    4. Krajczar K,
    5. Szalma J
    (2015) Retrospective evaluation of posterior direct composite restorations:10-year findings. Dent Mater 31:115–122.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Alexander G,
    2. Hopcraft MS,
    3. Tyas MJ,
    4. Wong RH
    (2014) Dentists’ restorative decision-making and implications for an ‘amalgamless’ profession. Part 2: a qualitative study. Aust Dent J 59:420–431.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Castillo-de Oyague R,
    2. Lynch C,
    3. McConnell R,
    4. Wilson N
    (2012) Teaching the placement of posterior resin-based composite restorations in Spanish dental schools. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 17:e661–e668.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Pashley DH,
    2. Tay FR,
    3. Breschi L,
    4. Tjaderhane L,
    5. Carvalho RM,
    6. Carrilho M,
    7. et al.
    (2011) State of the art etch-and-rinse adhesives. Dent Mater 27:1–16.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Van Meerbeek B,
    2. Yoshihara K,
    3. Yoshida Y,
    4. Mine A,
    5. De Munck J,
    6. Van Landuyt KL
    (2011) State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 27:17–28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Heintze SD,
    2. Monreal D,
    3. Peschke A
    (2015) Marginal quality of class ii composite restorations placed in bulk compared to an incremental technique: evaluation with SEM and stereomicroscope. J Adhes Dent 17:147–154.
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. Lynch CD,
    2. Opdam NJ,
    3. Hickel R,
    4. Brunton PA,
    5. Gurgan S,
    6. Kakaboura A,
    7. et al.
    (2014) Guidance on posterior resin composites: Academy of Operative Dentistry - European Section. J Dent 42:377–383.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Teich ST,
    2. Demko CA,
    3. Lang LA
    (2013) Evidence-based dentistry and clinical implementation by third-year dental students. J Dent Educ 77:1286–1299.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. Yamalik N,
    2. Karakoca Nemli S,
    3. Carrilho E,
    4. Dianiskova S,
    5. Melo P,
    6. Lella A,
    7. et al.
    (2015) Implementation of evidence-based dentistry into practice: analysis of awareness, perceptions and attitudes of dentists in the World Dental Federation-European Regional Organization zone through a multicentre questionnaire. Int Dent J 65:127–145.
    OpenUrl
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Citation Tools
Bookmark this article

Jump to section