METHODS: The questionnaire comprised 3 sections. The first part comprised questions regarding demographic features. The second part comprised questions on how treatment plans change according to factors such as nature, location, number and size of the pulp exposure, and patients' age. The third part composed of questions on the common materials and techniques used in DPC. To estimate the effect size, the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a meta-analysis software.

METHOD: An 11-question survey was distributed to dentists across 21 countries via different platforms. The survey comprised two sections: the first included five questions aimed at gathering demographic information, while the second consisted of six questions focusing on participants' practices related to the repair of composite or amalgam restorations A meta-analysis was employed to ascertain the pooled odds ratio of repairing versus replacement. The statistical analysis was carried out using the RevMan 5.3 program and forest plots were generated using the same program to visualize the results.

RESULTS: The survey was completed by 3680 dental practitioners. The results indicated a strong tendency to repair defective composite restorations (OR: 14.23; 95 % CI: 7.40, 27.35, p < 0.001). In terms of amalgam, there was a significant tendency to replace the restorations (OR: 0.19; 95 % CI: 0.12, 0.30, p < 0.001). When repairing restorations, the most common protocols were etching with orthophosphoric acid and creating an enamel bevel, regardless of the restorative material used.

CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicate that there exists a knowledge gap among dental practitioners regarding restoration repair. It is imperative that dental practitioners receive proper education and training on restoration repair, to ensure the usage of adequate protocols and restoration survival.