Dental Journal of Advance Studies

Register      Login

VOLUME 2 , ISSUE 2 ( May-August, 2014 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

A Survey of Irrigation Practice among Dental Practitioners in Himachal Pradesh

Damanpreet, Saurav Miglani, Babita Karda, Palvi Sarangal

Keywords : Dental Practitioners, Irrigant, Sodium Hypochlorite

Citation Information : Damanpreet, Miglani S, Karda B, Sarangal P. A Survey of Irrigation Practice among Dental Practitioners in Himachal Pradesh. 2014; 2 (2):80-83.

DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1671990

License: NA

Published Online: 12-05-2023

Copyright Statement:  NA


Aim: The purpose of this study was to determine current trends in irrigation practice among the practicing dentists in Himachal Pradesh. Methodology: A self prepared questionnaire comprising of 15 questions was e-mailed to 1970 members of the State Dental Council of Himachal Pradesh. The information gathered was the individual irrigant selection, irrigant concentration, smear layer removal, and use of adjuncts to irrigation. Results: A total of 544 replies were evaluated thus making the response rate of 27.6% for the study. Our data indicated that 38% of respondents primarily use sodium hypochlorite, with 61% of them using it at a concentration >5.0%. Only 21% of respondents aimed to remove the smear layer during endodontic treatment with only 7% using an adjunct to irrigation. Antibacterial activity was rated as the most important reason while selecting an irrigant. Conclusion: In spite of the crucial nature of the irrigation step in the endodontic therapy, the results of the study were not very satisfying especially when it comes to the use of adjuncts or newer irrigating systems. Thus there is need to regularly update and gauge the practices adopted by dental practitioners in the state.

PDF Share
  1. Haapasalo M, Shen Y, Qian W, Gao Y. Irrigation in Endodontics. Dent Clin N Am 2010;54:291–312.
  2. Hulsmann M, Hahn W. Complications during root canal irrigation: literature review and case reports. Int Endod J 2000;33:186–93.
  3. Carson KR, Goodell GG, McClanahan SB. Comparison of the antimicrobial activity of six irrigants on primary endodontic pathogens. J Endod. 2005;31:471–473.
  4. Clegg MS, Vertucci FJ, Walker C, Belanger M, Britto LR. The effect of exposure to irrigant solutions on apical dentin biofilms in vitro. J Endod. 2006;32:434–437.
  5. Garberoglio R, Becce C. Smear layer removal by root canal irrigants. A comparative scanning electron microscopic study. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology. 1994;78(3):359–367.
  6. Ayad MF. Effects of rotary instrumentation and different etchants on removal of smear layer on human dentin. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2001;85(1):67–72.
  7. Torabinejad M, Khademi AA, Babagoli J, Cho Y, Johnson WB, Bozhilov K et al. A new solution for removal of the smear layer. J Endod 2003;29:170–5.
  8. Gu L, Kim JR, Ling J, Choi KK, Pashley D, Tay F. Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J Endod 2009;35:791–804.
  9. Dutner J, Mines P, Anderson A. Irrigation Trends among American Association of Endodontists Members: A Web- based Survey. J Endod. 2012;38(1):37-40.
  10. Clarkson RM, Podlich HM, Savage NW, Moule AJ. A survey of sodium hypochlorite use by general dental practitioners and endodontists in Australia. Aust Dent J 2003;48:20–6.
  11. Ohara P, Torabinejad M, Kettering JD. Antibacterial effect of various endodontuic irrigants on selected anaerobic bacterias. Endod dent Traumatol 1993;9:95-100
  12. Erecan E, Ozekinci T, Atakul F, Gul K. Antibacterial activity of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite in infected root canals in vivo study. J Endod. 2004;30:84-87.
  13. Moss HD, Allemang JD, Johnson JD. Philosophies and practices regarding the management of the endodontic smear layer: results from two surveys. J Endod 2001;27:537–9.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.