ABSTRACT
Frail older adults who reside in long-term care (LTC) facilities face multiple barriers in receiving dental care. In edentulous LTC patients, the fabrication of complete dentures (CDs) can present challenges, leading to an increase in procedural or post-insertion appointments. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to document the number of fabrication and post-insertion follow-up appointments for CDs in frail older adults residing in LTC facilities. Data were collected from electronic patient records (AxiUm) and the Index of Clinical Oral Disorder in Elders (CODE) software utilized by the University of British Columbia Geriatric Dentistry Program from 2002 to 2018. A total of 362 CDs were fabricated between 2002 and 2018 in 272 patients. The mean number of visits required was 4.13 and 4.32, with standard deviations (Std) of 1.45 and 1.25 needed to fabricate maxillary CDs and mandibular CDs, respectively. The mean number of follow-up visits was 1.04 for maxillary dentures and 1.09 for mandibular dentures, with an Std of 1.25 for both, similar to the results obtained for adult patients in community dental clinics. Several factors were found to be associated with an increased number of CD fabrication and follow-up visits. Pre-operative assessment of the patient's cognitive/physical status and intra-oral condition may indicate the estimated time needed to fabricate CDs.
ABSTRACT
Methods: Ninety-six dental students each prepared tooth #36 for an all-ceramic crown on typodont models and were then randomly assigned into either group A: performed digital scan first, or Group B: performed conventional impression first. Procedure time was recorded for both. Immediately following each procedure, students indicated their perceived procedure difficulty. After exposure to both techniques, they selected their preferred one. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the mean procedure time of both techniques (P < 0.0001), where students spent 663.76 ± 442.50 seconds to complete the conventional impression and 293.32 ± 181.49 seconds to complete the digital scan. Females were significantly faster in completing the conventional impression compared to males. On the contrary, male students were faster in digital scanning than female students. There were no carryover effects in the duration and the initially performed procedure. 76% (73 of 96) of participants preferred digital scanning with no statistical significance shown between the preferred and initially performed procedure. Participants perceived conventional impressions to be more difficult than digital scans. There was a weak positive correlation between the VAS score and the procedure time for the digital technique (R = 0.25) and a moderate positive correlation for the conventional technique (R = 0.45). Conclusions: The digital technique was preferred and perceived as easier than the conventional among undergraduate dental students with no impression-making experience, suggesting their readiness for new technology uptake. However, no significant correlation was found between the initially performed procedure and preference.