Evidence-based practice and barriers to compliance: Face bow transfer

Shah, Kumar C.; Koka, Sreenivas

doi:10.1016/j.jpor.2015.09.004

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 8 ] Shah and Koka (2016) reported the prevalence of facebow teaching to be 93.75%. [ 9 ] Although all the surveys revealed that facebow transfer was an essential part in the fabrication of complete denture prosthesis, various evidences from clinical trials clinically opposed the use of facebow. Some RCTs have suggested that the facebow is not an integral part of complete denture fabrication, but saves the patients from inconvenient and tedious procedure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility versus futility of facebow in the fabrication of complete dentures: A systematic review

Prakash

Singh

Bahri

et al. 2020

J Indian Prosthodont Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of this review was to investigate utility or futility of facebow for fabrication of complete denture prosthesis to maximise clinical efficiency and acceptability of complete dentures. Settings and Design: Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines. Materials and Methods: A study question was designed based on PICOT model which was used to evaluate whether facebow transfer is required or not for fabrication of complete denture prosthesis. An extensive search was carried out manually and using electronic databases such as PubMed-Medline, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Parameters under review included patient satisfaction, masticatory efficiency, occlusal adjustments, clinician time, stability and retention. Boolean operators, MeSH terms and limiters were applied to develop the search and reach to conclusive studies pertaining to study design. Literature dated between 1950 and 2019 were selected. The data extraction and assessment of the studies was done by two independent investigators. Statistical Analysis Used: No meta-analysis was conducted due to heterogeneity of data obtained. Results: 13690 studies were shortlisted, 13672 were excluded based on title and abstract. By the end of search phase, 07 RCTs were considered relevant. 04 studies concluded comparable/ no differences in outcome with and without use of facebow for fabrication of complete denture prostheses, whereas 03 studies concluded better results without the use of facebow. Conclusion: The use of facebow results in fabrication of complete denture prostheses with similar results in terms of clinical efficiency and patient acceptability as compared to simplified techniques using anatomical landmarks. Variations in assessment criteria, non uniform distribution of sample size amongst different clinical trials and subjective questionnaire based criteria are the weaker links in the review. Extensive research and long term standardised studies with objective criteria for assessment are required for comprehensive and conclusive results to establish the need for change in clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility versus futility of facebow in the fabrication of complete dentures: A systematic review

Prakash

Singh

Bahri

et al. 2020

J Indian Prosthodont Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the validity of the facebow has been debated, Shah and Koka found in a 2015 survey that the prevalence of teaching the use of the facebow transfer had increased to 93.75% from 84% in 2003, which may be indicative of lack of acceptability of studies to the contrary, which do not constitute compelling evidence. To properly evaluate the facebow, one would have to limit a clinical research project to the facebow as the soul variable and outcome measures specific to the rationale for the facebow, and to date this has not been done.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[19][20][21] The practicality of using the facebow, especially in complete denture therapy, orthognathic surgery, and for occlusal stabilization devices, has been questioned because of a lack of an evidence-based philosophy and as an unnecessarily timeconsuming procedure with few benefits. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28] It is true that there is little evidence to justify the use of a facebow in all clinical diagnostic and treatment situations, especially complete denture prosthodontics, because the occlusion rims commonly provide the anatomical basis for articulation and esthetic reference, and the patient is used as the articulator.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%