Mohamed F Ayad1, Abdulhamid A Maghrabi, Stephen F Rosenstiel. 1. Section of Restorative Dentistry, Prosthodontics, and Endodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Tanta, 9 Al-Gaish Street, P.O. Box 443, Tanta 31111, Egypt. ayadmf@hotmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Convergence angles for complete crown preparations have been recommended at 4-12 degrees . However, practitioners have difficulty meeting these recommendations. This study measured and compared the convergence angles of tooth preparations for complete crowns prepared at three Colleges of Dentistry: the University of Tanta, Egypt, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia, and The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. METHODS: The convergence angles of 499 tooth preparations for complete crowns were evaluated. These comprised of a random sample of 262 teeth prepared by third-year dental students at the University of Tanta on extracted molars under normal preclinical conditions, 37 preparations on molar teeth on typodonts done by first-year dental students. The Ohio State University and 200 molar typodont complete crown preparations done by fourth-year dental students at King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia. The bucco-lingual and mesio-distal convergence angles of each preparation were measured with a goniometer microscope. Mean convergence angles were calculated, and differences between groups were tested for statistical significance with analysis of variance (ANOVA) at 5% level of confidence. RESULTS: Convergence angle measurements were significantly different between the groups and the dimensions (P<0.001). The greatest convergence value (19.8+/-10.0) was for bucco-lingual measurements prepared by Egyptian dental students. The smallest convergence value (14.1+/-3.8) was for mesio-distal measurements prepared by Saudi dental students. CONCLUSIONS: This study emphasized the difference between what is taught at dental schools (what is theoretically possible) and the school results of actual practice. There was a considerable disparity between the convergent angles recorded in this study and the ideal configurations recommended in fixed prosthodontic textbooks and the dental literature.
OBJECTIVES: Convergence angles for complete crown preparations have been recommended at 4-12 degrees . However, practitioners have difficulty meeting these recommendations. This study measured and compared the convergence angles of tooth preparations for complete crowns prepared at three Colleges of Dentistry: the University of Tanta, Egypt, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia, and The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. METHODS: The convergence angles of 499 tooth preparations for complete crowns were evaluated. These comprised of a random sample of 262 teeth prepared by third-year dental students at the University of Tanta on extracted molars under normal preclinical conditions, 37 preparations on molar teeth on typodonts done by first-year dental students. The Ohio State University and 200 molar typodont complete crown preparations done by fourth-year dental students at King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia. The bucco-lingual and mesio-distal convergence angles of each preparation were measured with a goniometer microscope. Mean convergence angles were calculated, and differences between groups were tested for statistical significance with analysis of variance (ANOVA) at 5% level of confidence. RESULTS: Convergence angle measurements were significantly different between the groups and the dimensions (P<0.001). The greatest convergence value (19.8+/-10.0) was for bucco-lingual measurements prepared by Egyptian dental students. The smallest convergence value (14.1+/-3.8) was for mesio-distal measurements prepared by Saudi dental students. CONCLUSIONS: This study emphasized the difference between what is taught at dental schools (what is theoretically possible) and the school results of actual practice. There was a considerable disparity between the convergent angles recorded in this study and the ideal configurations recommended in fixed prosthodontic textbooks and the dental literature.
Authors: Michael S McCracken; Mark S Litaker; Alexandra E S Thomson; Alan Slootsky; Gregg H Gilbert Journal: J Prosthodont Date: 2020-01-11 Impact factor: 2.752