Status of Sleep Apnea and Snoring Disorder Curriculum in U.S. Advanced Education Prosthodontic Programs.

PURPOSE: To assess the management of sleep apnea and snoring disorders in Advanced Education Programs in Prosthodontics (AEPP) in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 51 item, online survey was sent to program directors at 48 AEPPs in the United States in 2015. Data results were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Thirty-five program directors responded to the survey. Twenty-four (68.6%, N = 35) programs report not having a dedicated course for the treatment of sleep apnea and snoring disorders. The majority (94.3%) of programs chose to treat sleep disordered breathing with oral appliance therapy and 80.0% (N = 35) of programs utilize customized sleep apnea oral devices. However, only 48.6% (N = 35) and 51.4% (N = 35) of programs regularly address sleep apnea and snoring disorders at initial examination during the comprehensive exam and medical history questionnaire, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The confidence interval for this survey is 8.71 at a confidence level of 95% due to a response rate of 72.9%. This confidence interval suggests there is responder bias in the survey results. Therefore, the results of this survey provide a suggestion of how sleep disorders are managed in AEPPs. Programs appear to be consistent among each other with regards to treatment modalities for sleep disordered breathing. The results suggest that patients are not screened enough to receive treatment addressing sleep disorders.

Differences in Lip Support with and without Labial Flanges in a Maxillary Edentulous Population. Part 2: Blinded Subjective Analysis.

PURPOSE: To study the subjective differences in facial esthetics evaluations among lay people, general dentists, and prosthodontists, when evaluating images of patients wearing a maxillary denture with a labial flange in comparison to an experimental flangeless denture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A random sample of 20 maxillary edentulous patients from the original sample of 31 patients described in part 1 of the study was selected for this study. A total of 60 judges comprising 15 general dentists, 15 prosthodontists, and 30 lay people were recruited for subjective analysis. The judges were blinded about the objectives of the study and were asked to rate the facial esthetics of each image using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) instrument. Four digital images per subject (total of 80 images) were evaluated in a random order, twice by all 60 judges. A repeated measures general linear mixed modeling method using restricted maximum likelihood estimation was performed using mixed procedure in a statistical software package to study the differences in evaluations. RESULTS: The overall VAS ratings of facial esthetics for images with flangeless dentures were slightly lower compared to images with labial flanges, and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). This was true for both profile and frontal images; however, the magnitude of the difference was too small (no greater than 4 mm on a 100 mm scale) to be clinically significant. There were no statistically significant differences in facial esthetics ratings irrespective of the background or gender of the judges. CONCLUSIONS: Flangeless dentures resulted in slightly lower ratings of facial esthetics compared to images with a labial flange, but the differences were clinically insignificant. This was true for all judges comprising general dentists, prosthodontists, and lay people and for both frontal and profile images.

Differences in Lip Support with and without Labial Flanges in a Maxillary Edentulous Population - Part 3: Unblinded and Discriminatory Subjective Analysis.

PURPOSE: To study the subjective differences in direct lip support assessments and to determine if dentists and laypeople are able to discern and correctly identify direct changes in lip support between flange and flangeless dentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A random sample of 20 maxillary edentulous patients described in part 2 of the study was used for analysis. A total of 60 judges comprising 15 general dentists, 15 prosthodontists, and 30 laypeople, the majority of who were distinct from part 2 of the study, were recruited. All images used in this study were cropped at the infraorbital level and converted to black and white tone, to encourage the judges to focus on lip support. The judges were un-blinded to the study objectives and told what to look for, and were asked to rate the lip support of each of the 80 images on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). The judges then took a discriminatory sensory analysis test (triangle test) where they were required to correctly identify the image with a flangeless denture out of a set of 3 images. Both the VAS and triangle test ratings were conducted twice in a random order, and mean ratings were used for all analyses. RESULTS: The overall VAS ratings of lip support for images with flangeless dentures were slightly lower compared to images with labial flanges, and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). This was true for both profile and frontal images. However, the magnitude of these differences was too small (no greater than 5 mm on a 100-mm scale) to be clinically significant or meaningful. The differences in VAS ratings were not significant between the judges. For the triangle test, judges overall correctly identified the flangeless denture image in 55% of frontal image sets and 60% of profile image sets. The difference in correct identification rate between frontal and profile images was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). For frontal and profile images, prosthodontists had the highest correct identification rate (61% and 69%), followed by general dentists (53% and 68%) and by laypeople (53% and 50%). The difference in correct identification rate was statistically significant between various judges (p = 0.012). For all judges, the likelihood of correctly identifying images with flangeless dentures was significantly greater than 1/3, which was the minimum chance for correct identification (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Removal of a labial flange in a maxillary denture resulted in slightly lower ratings of lip support compared to images with a labial flange, but the differences were clinically insignificant. When judges were forced to look for differences, flangeless dentures were detected more often in profile images. Prosthodontists detected the flangeless dentures more often than general dentists and laypeople.

Prosthodontics treatment considerations for methamphetamine-dependent patients.

Overt dental disease is a distinguishing comorbidity associated with methamphetamine abuse, necessitating the need for special management to maximize treatment benefits. As this highly addictive stimulant increases in popularity, it has become imperative that clinicians are equipped to thoughtfully provide comprehensive care for these patients. This article reviews the impact of methamphetamine to systemic and oral health and proposes a comprehensive treatment plan and sequence for the methamphetamine-dependent patient. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended. Destructive oral and psychological changes must be identified and controlled. A thorough risk assessment, caries control, and preventative plan should be established before initiating prosthodontic treatment. Patient motivation, support, and a timely recall schedule are integral for dental longevity.

A direct technique for fabricating esthetic anterior fixed provisional restorations using polycarbonate veneers.

Fabrication of esthetic interim restorations by a chairside technique often challenges the clinician with regard to the required time and skills, as well as meeting the expectations of the patient. Autopolymerizing polymethyl methacrylate resin has been reported to be the most popular material for fabricating provisional restorations. However, this material does not routinely yield esthetic provisional restorations via a chairside technique. This article describes a simple technique to overcome some of the disadvantages of this material by using prefabricated polycarbonate facings backed with autopolymerizing acrylic resin. This technique can be used chairside for fabricating esthetic anterior interim restorations, utilizing the beneficial properties of both materials. It exploits the manufactured smooth-surface finish, superior esthetics, color stability, and durability of polycarbonate facings, as well as the marginal adaptation, strength, and low cost of autopolymerizing acrylic resin.