Assessing Clinical Communication for Fixed Prosthodontics Construction between Dental Laboratories and Dentists

S. Elsawaay, Enas Khamakhim
{"title":"Assessing Clinical Communication for Fixed Prosthodontics Construction between Dental Laboratories and Dentists","authors":"S. Elsawaay, Enas Khamakhim","doi":"10.47705/kjdmr.237107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective. This study aimed to estimate the communication between dental practitioners and dental technicians, through fixed prosthodontics from a dental laboratory technician's point of view, study the weak points, and try to offer them. Methods. In Tripoli, a randomized sample of private dental laboratories was chosen. A hundred and fifty questionnaires were distributed, and 130 were received (response rate=87%). A part of the questionnaires was mailed to the laboratory directors of dental laboratories and others were distributed to the dental technicians personally (face to face). The survey asked questions about the following areas of work authorization: Academic certificate, Years of work as a dental clinician, choice of materials for the prosthesis, design of the fixed prosthesis, and shade description. The use of impression materials for fixed prosthodontics was part of the questionnaire. For each question, the number of responses received was tabulated and converted to a percentage. Data were collected and analyzed statistically with (SPSS) version 25 software and Pearson’s Chi-square test p value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results. The findings showed that the telephone 42.9% and written dental prescription 24.2% are the main communication tools. The technician is more likely to choose fixed prosthesis design alone when conversing with doctors verbally or via email, while they sometimes choose it when sending them written prescriptions. Therefore, the best form of cooperation would be a written prescription. 84.6% of dental technicians received impressions in a non-disinfected state. The plastic stock tray was the most common choice of impression tray (75.4%). The minority of dental technicians 19.7% are discussing pontics design with the dentist. Conclusion. According to Tripoli dental technicians, good quality communication between both dental technologists and dentists is not always present. The connection between these two dental offices still needs work.","PeriodicalId":436335,"journal":{"name":"Khalij-Libya Journal of Dental and Medical Research","volume":"57 6 Suppl 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Khalij-Libya Journal of Dental and Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47705/kjdmr.237107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective. This study aimed to estimate the communication between dental practitioners and dental technicians, through fixed prosthodontics from a dental laboratory technician's point of view, study the weak points, and try to offer them. Methods. In Tripoli, a randomized sample of private dental laboratories was chosen. A hundred and fifty questionnaires were distributed, and 130 were received (response rate=87%). A part of the questionnaires was mailed to the laboratory directors of dental laboratories and others were distributed to the dental technicians personally (face to face). The survey asked questions about the following areas of work authorization: Academic certificate, Years of work as a dental clinician, choice of materials for the prosthesis, design of the fixed prosthesis, and shade description. The use of impression materials for fixed prosthodontics was part of the questionnaire. For each question, the number of responses received was tabulated and converted to a percentage. Data were collected and analyzed statistically with (SPSS) version 25 software and Pearson’s Chi-square test p value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results. The findings showed that the telephone 42.9% and written dental prescription 24.2% are the main communication tools. The technician is more likely to choose fixed prosthesis design alone when conversing with doctors verbally or via email, while they sometimes choose it when sending them written prescriptions. Therefore, the best form of cooperation would be a written prescription. 84.6% of dental technicians received impressions in a non-disinfected state. The plastic stock tray was the most common choice of impression tray (75.4%). The minority of dental technicians 19.7% are discussing pontics design with the dentist. Conclusion. According to Tripoli dental technicians, good quality communication between both dental technologists and dentists is not always present. The connection between these two dental offices still needs work.
评估口腔实验室与牙医在固定修复建造方面的临床交流
目标。本研究旨在评估牙科医师与牙科技师之间的沟通,从牙科实验室技师的角度,通过固定修复,研究弱点,并尝试提供。方法。在的黎波里,随机选择了私人牙科实验室的样本。共发放问卷150份,回收问卷130份,回复率为87%。一部分问卷邮寄给牙科实验室的实验室主任,另一部分问卷亲自分发给牙科技术人员(面对面)。该调查涉及以下工作授权方面的问题:学术证书、作为牙科临床医生的工作年限、假体材料的选择、固定假体的设计以及阴影描述。固定义齿印模材料的使用是调查问卷的一部分。对于每个问题,收到的答复数被制成表格并转换为百分比。数据收集采用SPSS 25版软件进行统计学分析,以p值< 0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果。调查结果显示,电话42.9%和书面牙科处方24.2%是主要的沟通工具。技术人员在与医生口头或通过电子邮件交谈时更有可能单独选择固定假体设计,而他们有时会在向医生发送书面处方时选择固定假体设计。因此,最好的合作形式是书面规定。84.6%的牙科技师在未消毒状态下接受印模。塑料托盘是印象托盘最常见的选择(75.4%)。19.7%的牙科技师会与牙医讨论支架设计。结论。根据的黎波里牙科技术人员的说法,牙科技术人员和牙医之间并不总是存在高质量的沟通。这两个牙科诊所之间的连接还需要修理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信