Comparison of the Kois Dento-Facial Analyzer System with an earbow for mounting a maxillary cast.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The Kois Dento-Facial Analyzer System (KDFA) is used by clinicians to mount maxillary casts and evaluate and treat patients. Limited information is available for understanding whether the KDFA should be considered as an alternative to an earbow. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate maxillary casts mounted using the KDFA with casts mounted using Panadent's Pana-Mount Facebow (PMF). Both articulation methods were compared against a lateral cephalometric radiograph. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifteen dried human skulls were used. Lateral cephalometric radiographs and 2 maxillary impressions were made of each skull. One cast from each skull was mounted on an articulator by means of the KDFA and the other by using the PMF. A standardized photograph of each articulation was made, and the distance from the articular center to the incisal edge position and the occlusal plane angle were measured. The distance from condylar center to the incisal edge and the occlusal plane angle were measured from cephalometric radiographs. Finally, the 3-dimensional position of each articulation was determined with a Panadent CPI-III. A randomized complete block design analysis of variance (RCBD) and post hoc tests (Tukey-Kramer HSD) (α=.05) were used to evaluate the occlusal plane angle and axis-central incisor distance. A paired 2-sample t test for means (α=.05) was used to compare the X, Y, and Z distance at the right and left condyle. RESULTS: The KDFA and PMF mounted the maxillary cast in a position that was not statistically different from the skull when comparing the occlusal plane angle (P=.165). Both the KDFA and the PMF located the maxillary central incisor edge position in a significantly different position compared with the skull (P=.001) but were not significantly different from each other. The 3-dimensional location of the maxillary casts varied at the condyles by approximately 9 to 10.3 mm. CONCLUSION: The KDFA mounted the maxillary cast in a position that was not statistically different from the PMF when comparing the incisal edge position and the occlusal plane angle. Both the KDFA and the PMF located the maxillary incisal edge position in a significantly different position compared with the anatomic position on dried human skulls.

Survey of partial removable dental prosthesis (partial RDP) types in a distinct patient population.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Current demographic information on the number and types of removable partial dentures is lacking in the prosthodontic literature. PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate patterns of tooth loss in patients receiving removable partial dentures (RPDs) in eastern Wisconsin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Digital images (1502) of casts at 5 dental laboratories in eastern Wisconsin were collected. Any prescription requesting fabrication of a removable partial denture was photographed twice. The first photograph was made immediately upon arrival at the laboratory, while the second photograph was made immediately before being returned to the prescribing dentist for the first time. A calibrated investigator analyzed all the photographs for Kennedy Classification, type of RPD, major connector, and other details. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Fisher's exact test was used to confirm repeatability. RESULTS: Kennedy Class I was the most common RPD with a frequency of 38.4%. More than 40% of prescriptions had no design input from the dentist. One in 3 RPDs used acrylic resin or flexible frameworks. One in 5 RPDs had no rests. The horseshoe major connector was the most common maxillary major connector, while the lingual plate was the most common in the mandible. CONCLUSIONS: RPDs remain a common prosthodontic treatment in this region. Non-metal RPD frameworks are a common treatment type and rarely include rests. These data indicate a changing partially edentulous patient population and a variable commitment to standard levels of prosthodontic care.