Abstract
Variations in treatment planning and prescription have been described in relation to routine restorative dentistry. This study examined dentists' decisions regarding treatment planning for fixed bridgework. Fifty five dentists who attended a Continuing Education course on fixed bridgework were given standard information about a patient in the form of study casts, photographs of radiographs and a clinical history. They were asked to design a bridge where a previous one had failed and to complete a proforma which was returned to the course organisers in advance of the event. The response rate was 65%. The data showed wide variation in identification of features of diagnostic importance. Seventy percent of respondents chose to use again as abutments teeth which were extensively damaged and had failed to retain the previous bridge: while only 30% noted features of the occlusion which if left unchanged would have precluded a successful bridge from being made. A further feature was that nearly 70% chose to use multiple abutments to support the bridge. The implications of these results were discussed with respect to current concepts of bridge design.
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Bader J D, Shugars D A . Agreement among dentists' recommendations for restorative treatment. J Dent Res 1993; 72: 891–896.
Roberts D H . The failure of retainers of fixed bridge prostheses. Br Dent J 1970; 128: 117–124.
Cheung G S . A preliminary investigation into the longevity and causes of failure of single unit extra-coronal restorations. J Dent 1991; 19: 160–163.
Palmqvist S, Soderfelt B . Multi-variate analyses of factors influencing the longevity of fixed partial dentures, retainers and abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1994; 71: 245–250.
Grieve A, McAndrew R . A radiographic study of post-retained crowns in patients attending a dental hospital. Br Dent J 1993; 174: 197–201.
Valler L M . An evaluation of the longevity and causes of failure of post-retained crowns. RADC Bulletin 1998/99; 26: 63–66.
Lewis R, Smith B G N . A clinical survey of failed post-retained crowns. Br Dent J 1988; 165: 95–97.
Torbjorner A, Karlsson S, Odman P A . Survival rate and failure characteristics of two post designs. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 73: 439–444.
Sedgeley C M, Messer H H . Are endodontically treated teeth more brittle. J Endod 1992; 18: 332–335.
Guzy G E, Nicholls J I . In vitro comparison of intact endodontically treated teeth with and without endo-post reinforcement. J Prosthet Dent 1979; 42: 39–44.
Sorensen J A, Martinoff J T . Clinically significant factors in dowel design. J Prosthet Dent 1984; 52: 28–35.
Sorensen J A, Engelman M J . Ferrule design and fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 63: 529–536.
Shillingburg H T, Hobo S, Whitsett L D, Jacobi R, Brackett S . Fundamentals of Fixed Prosthodontics. 3rd Edition 1997; pp. 91–93. Quintessence Publishing Co. Inc. Boston, USA.
Ante I H . The fundamental principles, design and construction of crown and bridge prosthetics. Dental Items of Interest 1928; pp. 215–232. Published in Classic Prosthodontic articles. A Collector's Item (1976) 1: 271–288. American College of Prosthodontists.
Dahl B L, Krogstad O K, Karlsen K . An alternative treatment in cases with advanced localized attrition. J Oral Rehab 1975; 2: 209–214.
Smyd E S . The role of torque, torsion and bending in prosthodontic failures. J Prosthet Dent 1961; 11: 95–111.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Refereed paper
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ibbetson, R., Hemmings, K. & Ward, V. Variations in planning fixed bridgework — a group of dentists at a case-based postgraduate cours. Br Dent J 187, 159–163 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800229
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800229
