A Critically Appraised Topic Review of Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Machining of Removable Partial Denture Frameworks

Lang, Lisa A.; Tulunoğlu, İbrahim

doi:10.1016/j.cden.2013.09.006

Cited by 32 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of optical scanners is perhaps reaching a tipping point, with dentists reporting they use optical impressions about 9% of the time to make single‐unit crown impressions. This trend is expected to continue, as more clinicians choose to make crown impressions digitally, and apply this technology to other aspects of dentistry, such as fabricating removable prostheses . However, there is little documentation of the prevalence of these techniques in private practice, or which practitioner characteristics correlate with their use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…This trend is expected to continue, as more clinicians choose to make crown impressions digitally, 14,56 and apply this technology to other aspects of dentistry, such as fabricating removable prostheses. 57 However, there is little documentation of the prevalence of these techniques in private practice, or which practitioner characteristics correlate with their use. Three factors were significantly correlated with the use of digital scanners among clinicians who used digital impressions more than 90% of the time for single-unit crown impressions: race, type of practice, and practice busyness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impression Techniques Used for Single‐Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice‐Based Research Network

McCracken

Louis

Litaker

et al. 2017

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To: (1) determine which impression and gingival displacement techniques practitioners use for single-unit crowns on natural teeth; and (2) test whether certain dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with the use of these techniques. Materials and Methods Dentists participating in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network were eligible for this survey study. The study used a questionnaire developed by clinicians, statisticians, laboratory technicians, and survey experts. The questionnaire was pre-tested via cognitive interviewing with a regionally diverse group of practitioners. The survey included questions regarding gingival displacement and impression techniques. Survey responses were compared by dentist and practice characteristics using ANOVA. Results The response rate was 1777 of 2132 eligible dentists (83%). Regarding gingival displacement, most clinicians reported using either a single cord (35%) or dual cord (35%) technique. About 16% of respondents preferred an injectable retraction technique. For making impressions, the most frequently used techniques and materials are: poly(vinyl siloxane), 77%; polyether, 12%; optical/digital, 9%. A dental auxiliary or assistant made the final impression 2% of the time. Regarding dual-arch impression trays, 23% of practitioners report they typically use a metal frame tray, 60% use a plastic frame, and 16% do not use a dual-arch tray. Clinicians using optical impression techniques were more likely to be private practice owners or associates. Conclusions This study documents current techniques for gingival displacement and making impressions for crowns. Certain dentist and practice characteristics are significantly associated with these techniques.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impression Techniques Used for Single‐Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice‐Based Research Network

McCracken

Louis

Litaker

et al. 2017

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also the SleepGuard appliance, 13 which until 2001 was sold as Grindalert, 14 emits a sound upon EMG registration of masticatory muscle activity. Finally, the GrindCare device now manufactured by Butler 15 and previously by Medotech 16 sends out an electrical impulse upon EMG registration of masticatory muscle activity. Grindcare is the only digital appliance amongst the cited that appears to have been studied scientifically (27).…”

Section: Computer-assisted Patient Diagnosticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer‐assisted technologies used in oral rehabilitation and the clinical documentation of alleged advantages – a systematic review

Jokstad

2017

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this systematic review is to identify current computer-assisted technologies used for managing patients with a need to re-establish craniofacial appearance, subjective discomfort and stomatognathic function, and the extent of their clinical documentation. Electronic search strategies were used for locating clinical studies in MEDLINE through PubMed and in the Cochrane library, and in the grey literature through searches on Google Scholar. The searches for commercial digital products for use in oral rehabilitation resulted in identifying 225 products per November 2016, used for patient diagnostics, communication and therapy purposes, and for other computer-assisted applications in context with oral rehabilitation. About one-third of these products were described in about 350 papers reporting from clinical human studies. The great majority of digital products for use in oral rehabilitation has no clinical documentation at all, while the products from a distinct minority of manufacturers have frequently appeared in more or less scientific reports. Moore's law apply also to digital dentistry, which predicts that the capacity of microprocessors will continue to become faster and with lower cost per performance unit, and innovative software programs will harness these improvements in performance. The net effect is the noticeable short product life cycle of digital products developed for use in oral rehabilitation and often lack of supportive clinical documentation. Nonetheless, clinicians must request clinically meaningful information about new digital products to assess net benefits for the patients or the dental professionals and not accept only technological verbiage as a basis for product purchases.

show abstract

“…T he advent of computer-aided design/computerassisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) technology in dentistry has enabled the accurate fabrication of customized dental prostheses in a short time. Since the 1970s, CAD/CAM technology has replaced the traditional methods of processing dental prostheses and expanded its application 1-3 from the fabrication of fixed dental prostheses, including fixed partial dentures and crowns, to class II inlays [4][5][6][7] and the design of removable partial dentures and complete dentures, [8][9][10] as well as implant prostheses and surgical guides. [11][12][13][14] CAD/CAM systems can decrease deformation, in particular, those caused by the traditional lost wax technique, and impart regular material properties.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Customized Abutments Made from Titanium and a Machinable Precious Alloy

Lee¹,

Park²,

Park³

et al. 2016

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Critically Appraised Topic Review of Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Machining of Removable Partial Denture Frameworks

Cited by 32 publications

References 12 publications

Impression Techniques Used for Single‐Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice‐Based Research Network

Impression Techniques Used for Single‐Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice‐Based Research Network

Computer‐assisted technologies used in oral rehabilitation and the clinical documentation of alleged advantages – a systematic review

Comparison of Customized Abutments Made from Titanium and a Machinable Precious Alloy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About