{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01256106071179344, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0013956734124214933, 'mean_word_length': 5.5181818181818185, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Next generation of dentists moving to amalgam-free dentistry: Survey of posterior restorations teaching in North America.

OBJECTIVES
The dental field is gradually reducing the use of amalgam and moving towards adhesive restoration. This change is in accordance with the advancement and improvement of composite resin materials and adhesion systems. Consequently, posterior cavity preparations teaching should be re-examined to determine whether dental schools are adapting their curriculum to fit the current trends in dentistry and what rationale supports their decisions.


METHODS
An online questionnaire was constructed to assess the time dedicated to teaching composite materials and amalgam, in addition to the principles of posterior preparations, for composite restorations in North American dental schools.


RESULTS
A total 33 schools responded to the questionnaire. A large variation was found in teaching methods and techniques of posterior restorations. The reasoning for teaching amalgam restorations was diverse as were the principles of composite resin preparation taught.


CONCLUSION
No agreed principles of cavity preparation for resin composite restorations were found, as opposed to explicit agreement on amalgam cavity preparations. The results demonstrate a lack of clear guidelines for cavity preparation of resin composite restorations. Dental schools may benefit when a consensus on this topic is achieved.