Quality of communication between dentists and dental technicians for fixed and removable prosthodontics

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of communication between dental practitioners and dental technicians through work authorizations and selection of impression trays and materials for both fixed and removable prosthodontics in the Dental College of King Saud University.Methods and materials: A questionnaire was distributed to the dental technicians concerning the quality of written instructions in the work authorization form. Use of impression trays and materials for fixed and removable prosthodontics, were part of the questionnaire. Out of two hundred distributed questionnaires, 136 were received (response rate = 68%). Using pre-determined grading criteria.Results: The findings showed that half of the written instructions were considered ''clear'', out of which 34% the technician had to seek clarification from the dentist concerning the written instructions which reveal inadequate prescription. The special tray was the most common choice of impression tray (53.8%) and the elastomers were the most common impression material used (71%) for both fixed and removable prosthodontics. The technicians were certain that the final impression had been disinfected in only 81% of cases.Conclusion: This study showed that it is worth emphasizing that clear and effective communication about design information is essential to ensure fabricating good quality fixed and removable prostheses.

The Quality of Written Prescriptions Received at Dental Laboratories in Tabriz, Iran

“…It was left to the technician in almost 72.7% of the cases which may affect the ultimate functional and aesthetic outcomes. The results of this study are generally in line with surveys conducted in various regions of the world (Al-AlSheikh, 2012;Aslam & Ahmed, 2015;Avrampou et al, 2012;Berry et al, 2014b;Cotmore, Mingledorf, Pomerantz, & Grasso, 1983;Dickie et al, 2014;Haj-Ali, Al Quran, & Adel, 2012;Radhi et al, 2007;Schwarz & Barsby, 1980).…”

“…Moreover, disinfection status of the items was mentioned in only 9.3% of the cases (8.3% positive, 1% negative). These results were similar to those of other studies (Al-AlSheikh, 2012;Radhi, Lynch, & Hannigan, 2007;Scully, Moles, & Fiske, 2007). Al-Kheraif evaluated infection control in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and reported that the impressions referred to 9.4% of laboratories were not disinfected (Al-kheraif, 2008) and laboratories did not even receive any feedback on disinfecting process in 90.6% of the cases.…”

“…The number of pontics being replaced was mentioned in 41% of the cases; while, pontic design was only noted in 1% of prescriptions. Financial considerations are the reason why number of pontics receives more attention (Al-AlSheikh, 2012;Sui et al, 2014). The majority of laboratories charge a definite fee per pontic; thus unspecified number of pontics results in an additional cost.…”

Communication Between Dentists and Dental Technicians During the Fabrication of Removable Partial Dentures in Khartoum State, Sudan

“…It is possible that dentists put a greater emphasis on CC-RPD instructions than A-RPD instructions because of the high cost of CC-RPDs, or because CC-RPDs were prescribed by dentists who possessed greater skills than those who prescribed A-RPDs. The results of this research showed that most of the design components for A- and CC-RPDs were not clearly prescribed, which again is similar to previous studies ( 13 , 17 , 23 , 24 ). This again indicates that dentists leave it mainly to technicians to design the prosthesis, which is unacceptable as the dentists should be fully responsible for the RPD design, since they perform the examination, diagnosis, and treatment planning.…”

“…These findings are disappointing as CC-RPDs are more proficient in maintaining oral health than A-RPD, and the latter may even have harmful effects on the oral tissues ( 10 , 18 , 19 ). Reasons for the frequent prescription of A-RPD may be the high financial cost of CC-RPD and lack of educational or clinical experience in constructing CC-RPD ( 13 ). Based on the number of design components, most of the A- and CC-RPD instructions in the current study were not considered clear.…”