Zahra Afsharzand1, Behnoush Rashedi, Vicki C Petropoulos. 1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, University of Pennsylvania School of Dental Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6003, USA. afsharza@pobox.upenn.edu
Abstract
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. J Prosthodont 2006;15:202-207. Copyright (c) 2006 by The American College of Prosthodontists.
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. J Prosthodont 2006;15:202-207. Copyright (c) 2006 by The American College of Prosthodontists.
Authors: Anke Wagner; Elena Tsarouha; Eylem Ög; Christine Preiser; Monika A Rieger; Esther Rind Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-02-24 Impact factor: 3.295