LAUSR

OBJECTIVE To develop consensus from experts in Restorative Dentistry based in the United Kingdom (UK) on the most appropriate tooth replacement strategies in adult patients with reduced dentitions using a modified Delphi analysis. METHODS An expert panel of UK specialists (n=20) in Restorative Dentistry or Prosthodontics were asked to answer the following question: using available evidence and your clinical experience, how appropriate is each tooth replacement strategy for each clinical scenario of tooth loss in the mandible presented? Five specific clinical patterns of tooth loss were presented to panellists using clinical photographs, and using a 9-point Likert scale, they were asked to rate the appropriateness of listed tooth replacement strategies during two Delphi rounds. The target level of consensus for each statement was 70%. RESULTS Consensus was reached on the appropriateness of thirty-seven tooth replacement strategies (37%) across ten clinical scenarios. Of these, thirteen were considered appropriate (13%) and twenty-four were considered inappropriate (24%). CONCLUSION The results from this Delphi process represent the consensus professional views of an expert panel of UK specialists in Restorative Dentistry and Prosthodontics. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Tooth replacement for partially dentate patients is a common clinical consideration. This study provides evidence from a Delphi process to help clinicians and patients make informed choices about appropriate and inappropriate treatment options.