Clinical and laboratory parameters in fixed prosthodontic treatment

Considerations for services from dental technicians in fabrication of fixed prostheses: A survey of commercial dental laboratories in Thessaloniki, Greece

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Effective communication and cooperation between dentists and dental technicians are essential in providing quality services. There has been a lack of information regarding dentist-dental technician communications and current methods and materials used for the fabrication of fixed partial dentures (FPDs).

PURPOSE

This cross-sectional study identified the materials and techniques used for fabrication of FPDs, as well as the status of communication between dentists and dental technicians in Thessaloniki, Greece.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A questionnaire was developed with 7 sections pertaining to procedures and materials used for the fabrication of fixed prostheses: general questions, infection control, impressions/interocclusal records, die technique/mounting, information from final casts, prostheses design/materials, and communication/shade selection. The questionnaire was anonymous and distributed by the Association of Dental Technicians of Thessaloniki to all member laboratories (228) in the wider province of Thessaloniki, Greece. Due to the absence of normal distribution of the results, frequencies and medians were reported.

RESULTS

Ninety-six of 228 dental laboratories responded (42.1% response rate). Twenty-six percent of dental laboratories did not routinely disinfect incoming items. The dental technicians considered 30% of incoming final impressions and 20% of interocclusal registrations as inadequate. Half of the time (55%) final casts were mounted by technicians on simple hinge articulators. Only 20% of tooth preparations had adequate finish lines. The majority (70%) of fixed restorations were metal-ceramic. Fifty-seven percent of dental technicians considered the delivery time requested by dentists as insufficient.

CONCLUSION

The information provided in this study indicates areas of weakness in communication between dentists and dental technicians, along with areas where both parties should use greater care during clinical and laboratory procedures.

Dentist communication with the dental laboratory for prosthodontic treatment using implants

PURPOSE

A questionnaire was sent to U.S. dental laboratories to evaluate the level of communication between dentists and laboratory technicians and to determine trends in procedures and materials used in fixed and removable implant restorations.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Dental laboratories were randomly chosen from the National Association of Dental Laboratories for each of the 50 states. The questionnaire was mailed to the laboratory directors for 199 dental laboratories. One hundred fourteen dental laboratories returned the survey, yielding a response rate of 57%. Of those laboratories, 37 indicated that they did not participate in the fabrication of fixed implant restorations, yielding a response rate of 39%. Forty-two dental laboratories indicated that they did not participate in the fabrication of implant-retained overdenture prostheses, yielding a response rate of 36%.

RESULTS

Results from this survey show inadequate communication by dentists in completing work authorization forms. Custom trays are used more frequently for implant-retained overdenture impressions and stock trays for impressions of fixed implant prostheses. Poly(vinyl siloxane) is the material most commonly used for both fixed and removable implant-supported prostheses. Two implants with stud attachments are used more widely than those with bar attachments for implant-retained overdentures.

CONCLUSIONS

Most laboratories working on implant prosthodontic cases report inadequate communication between the laboratory and dentists related to materials and techniques used in fabrication of implant restorations.