Abstract
Enamel is the most highly mineralised tissue in the body, yet once lost, it cannot biologically regenerate. This webinar examines the everyday clinical challenge of enamel protection, exploring the key drivers of enamel compromise — including erosion, abrasion, attrition, and early demineralisation — and the behavioural, dietary, and biological factors that shift the balance between mineral loss and repair. Participants will gain a clearer understanding of how demineralisation and remineralisation interact, why exposure frequency often matters more than volume, and which patient groups warrant the most proactive enamel-focused intervention. The session takes a practical, prevention-first approach, translating the science into advice patients can realistically follow and product recommendations that are matched to individual clinical need. Two home-care options are illustrated through real-world case examples — one fluoride-containing and one fluoride-free — demonstrating how to integrate product selection into a broader preventive strategy. The overarching message is that early, targeted prevention consistently outperforms later restorative intervention.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this session, participants will be able to:
- Identify the primary chemical, mechanical, and biological causes of enamel compromise and recognise which patient groups are at greatest clinical risk.
- Explain the demineralisation–remineralisation cycle and describe how exposure frequency, saliva function, and behavioural patterns influence net enamel outcomes.
- Apply evidence-informed, patient-centred prevention strategies — including diet modification, brushing technique, and exposure timing — to reduce ongoing enamel loss in everyday practice.
- Differentiate between fluoride-containing and fluoride-free remineralisation options and select home-care products based on individual patient need and preference.
- Integrate enamel protection counselling into routine clinical conversations using case-based examples to guide realistic, achievable patient recommendations.
Supported by
