A survey of denture identification marking within the United Kingdom

Abstract

• Identification marking of dentures is regulated by guidelines in several other countries.• Within the UK, there are no specific guidelines or policies for civilian denture identifi ca tion marking.• The prevalence of denture marking in the UK is low.• The overwhelming opinion of prosthodontic specialists within the UK supports the philosophy of denture marking as a routine procedure.A survey of denture identifi cation marking within the United Kingdom Aim To assess the attitudes of healthcare workers within the UK towards identification marking of removable prostheses, and quantify the frequency with which this is currently undertaken. Design A postal questionnaire-based study. Setting The study was undertaken within the UK between 2002 and 2006 and surveyed prosthodontists working in a wide range of clinical settings. Subjects and methods Questionnaires were sent to two sample groups: 1. Specialists in prosthodontics registered on the GDC specialist list; 2. Nursing staff in elderly care homes within the locality of Glasgow. Results Return rate of questionnaires from prosthodontic specialists was high, with 119 from 160 (74%) completed and returned. 54.9% of prosthodontic specialists carried out complete denture marking in their clinical practice and 40.9% undertook identification marking of partial removable prostheses. The vast majority (81.0%) of special ists indicated that denture identification marking was a worthwhile procedure. Furthermore, 68.9% thought the introduction of some form of guideline would be beneficial. Differences in the frequency of den ture marking existed between varying clinical environments. Denture marking was not undertaken by healthcare workers within any of the surveyed care homes. Conclusion The overwhelming opinion of prosthodontic special ists within the UK promotes the use of denture marking as a routine procedure.

Denture identification marking should be standard practice

“…This study also revealed that in six major dental laboratories marking was performed on 90-100% of complete dentures. Although the extent of denture marking was significantly greater than that found by Murray et al 3 the level of marking in this Scandinavian study demonstrated that over 50% of dentures were unmarked. In a very large study comprising of 1,715 residents from nursing homes in Sweden, the frequency of marked complete dentures evaluated by a screening examination revealed only 35% of the 1,215 dentures among the 1,715 residents were marked.…”

“…6.8% of dentures were marked and for the same year in Scotland 3.75% dentures were marked. 3 At that stage the NHS were remunerating dentists using a fee per item scale so an additional fee was available for a permanent patient identification marker in a denture.…”

“…Murray et al in their comprehensive study 3 surveyed 160 prosthodontists of whom 119 responded (74%), 54.9% reported that they carried out complete denture marking in their clinical practice. The vast majority (81.0%) of prosthodontic specialists indicated that denture identification marking was a worthwhile procedure.…”

“…Firstly, it enables the identification and return of lost or misplaced dentures, which is essential in institutions such as hospitals and residential care homes. [1][2][3] Secondly, it is beneficial in post-mortem identification of the denture wearer. 1,3 This topic has been subject to a number of reports of differing techniques with an emphasis on the durability of the identification marker in the event of disaster.…”

“…[1][2][3] Secondly, it is beneficial in post-mortem identification of the denture wearer. 1,3 This topic has been subject to a number of reports of differing techniques with an emphasis on the durability of the identification marker in the event of disaster. 4 The aim of this opinion paper is particularly to focus on denture identification marking for the individual who is hospitalised, receiving respite care or institutionalised.…”