Surveys of Current Teaching and Practice for Impressions for Complete Dentures

Affiliations


Abstract

Objectives: The 3 objectives are to assess current preferences for impressions for complete dentures, audit practice and compare practice to current UK teaching.

Methods: Three surveys where undertaken; a survey of GDPs preferences, an audit of practice and a survey of teaching in UK dental schools.

Results: UK Universities advocate border moulded custom trays. In stated preferences, 99% of practitioners used custom trays for private practice; 67% for NHS work. In actual use, the audit found 91% practitioners in private practice used custom trays; in NHS practice 78% did so. The most widely taught materials were silicone (43%), alginate (29%), & zinc oxide eugenol paste (19%). In practitioners stated preferences, 97% of NHS and 53% of private dentists listed alginate as an option; however the audit showed only 74% (NHS) and 52% (private) actually used alginate, with 20% (NHS) and 48% (private) using silicone.

Conclusions: Definitive impressions in custom trays are used by GDPs for both private and NHS work; they are universally taught at UK dental schools. Alginate is popular in NHS practice; however, silicone is more widely taught in UK Universities. The use of silicone materials for definitive impressions has increased since 1999. In UK private practice silicone usage is aligned in popularity with alginate.

Keywords: Denture; General Dental Practice; Impression; Prosthodontic; Removable Prosthesis.


Similar articles

Survey of prosthodontic impression procedures for complete dentures in general dental practice in the United Kingdom.

Hyde TP, McCord JF.J Prosthet Dent. 1999 Mar;81(3):295-9. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(99)70272-6.PMID: 10050117

An investigation into the bitewing radiographic prescribing patterns of West Kent general dental practitioners.

Mauthe PW, Eaton KA.Prim Dent Care. 2011 Jul;18(3):107-14.PMID: 21740700

A complete denture impression technique survey of postdoctoral prosthodontic programs in the United States.

Mehra M, Vahidi F, Berg RW.J Prosthodont. 2014 Jun;23(4):320-7. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12099. Epub 2013 Oct 7.PMID: 24118134

What is the evidence base for the efficacies of different complete denture impression procedures? A critical review.

Carlsson GE, Ortorp A, Omar R.J Dent. 2013 Jan;41(1):17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.11.015. Epub 2012 Dec 3.PMID: 23219617 Review.

Vinyl polysiloxane impression material in removable prosthodontics. Part 1: edentulous impressions.

Massad JJ, Cagna DR.Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2007 Aug;28(8):452-9; quiz 460, 470.PMID: 18578103 Review.


Cited by

Evaluation of dental practitioner habits with occlusal assessment and the clinical application of practical techniques in occlusion, amongst a cohort of participants based in the UK, South Africa, Malta and Malaysia.

Mehta SB, Rizzo D, Paulose B, Botbol A, Vijay S, Arjuna A, Banerji S.J Oral Rehabil. 2022 Oct;49(10):944-953. doi: 10.1111/joor.13358. Epub 2022 Jul 27.PMID: 35851718 Free PMC article.


KMEL References