Communicating Prosthetic Prescriptions from Dental Students to the Dental Laboratory: Is the Message Getting Through?

Abstract

The aim of this research was to investigate the quality of written prosthetic prescriptions provided by fourth-year dental students to a commercially operated dental laboratory and to ascertain the contribution of interprofessional education to improving prescription quality. Based on guidelines established by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency of the European Union (Medical Device Directive 93/42/EEC), an audit was conducted prior to and after an educational intervention was delivered by a dental technician to a dental student cohort at one Australian dental school. Prior to the intervention, thirtynine dental prosthetic prescriptions were collected, analyzed, and audited to determine the clarity of written communication and instructions from dental student to dental technician. Following the intervention, a further forty prosthetic prescriptions were collected from the same cohort of students and were audited. The audit of the initial prescriptions showed that 85 percent (n=33) did not comply with the recommended conventions. After the intervention, the prescriptions that did not meet the guidelines had fallen to 30 percent (n=12) of the total. Improvements in prosthetic prescriptions submitted by these dental students to the commercial dental laboratory suggest there is an advantage to including a prosthetic prescription-writing module in dental school curricula.

Laboratory Trends for Removable Prosthodontics: A Comparison of Two Surveys

“…An audit of Australian dental students’ laboratory work authorizations found that 85% did not meet the required standards. After an intervention with students, however, the number at the next audit dropped to 30% 15 . This is in alignment with other authors who suggest that more emphasis and time be placed on the partnership between dentists and technicians within the dental school curriculum 10,16,20 .…”

“…These studies have been conducted in many countries and regions, indicating that this is a common, global concern. In the United States, in particular, 2,5,8,12,14 this is likely compounded by many factors, including the large variation in legislation and nomenclature throughout the country 14 and wide variation in educational content concerning laboratory communication and laboratory work authorizations 15–18 . Finally, there has been a decrease in accredited dental laboratory technology education programs and formally trained dental technicians 18 .…”

Factors Associated with Insufficient Removable Partial Denture Design Instructions

“…Most studies have determined the quality of RPD design instructions according to the scores given by technicians as "clear, a guide, poor, none". 1,7,[12][13][14][15][16][17] This kind of scoring may lead the technician to decide in a subjective manner. In the current study, to reduce the subjectivity of the technician, a question about RPD design elements was included.…”

“…1,7,8,[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] The studies that investigated the quality of the written prescriptions considered the following items: personal data of the patients, [17][18][19][20] submission and completion date, [16][17][18]20 fee, 20 shade of teeth, [16][17][18][19][20] material selection for prostheses, [16][17][18] design information, 7,8,13,16,17,19,20 and quality of the prescription (assessed as clear, a guide, poor, or none). 1,7,[12][13][14][15][16][17] According to the results of these investigations, the quality of the written prescriptions was often reported as poor 1,7,13,14,…”

“…1,7,[12][13][14][15][16][17] According to the results of these investigations, the quality of the written prescriptions was often reported as poor 1,7,13,14,17,19 and design of the prostheses was often delegated to the technician. 1,7,8,[13][14][15][16][17]19,20 Most studies about the communication concerned the quality of prescriptions. However, there is still a need for discussion on probable factors that may be responsible for delegating the design to the technician.…”