Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2020; 9(03): 122-128
DOI: 10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_25_20
Original Article

Evaluation of Abutment Parallelism and Path of Withdrawal Using Three Intra- and One Extra-Oral Methods: A Survey and In vitro Study

Mohammed Sayed
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia
,
Harisha Dewan
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia
,
Manal Mubaraki
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia
,
Zahra Khubrani
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia
,
Sabreen Hummadi
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia
,
Carlos Alberto Jurado
1   Division of Digital Dentistry, A. T. Still University Arizona School of Dentistry and Oral Health, Mesa, Arizona
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate four different methods used to examine preparation taper and relative parallelism of the prepared abutment teeth. Materials and Methods: A total of 12 artificial teeth were prepared simulating six sets of prepared abutments. Proximal walls of the premolars in all sets were prepared parallel and 90° to the occlusal plane, whereas walls of the second molars were prepared either 0°, 20°, or 45° to the long axis of the premolar preparation. A total number of 210 participants were involved in the study. All data of the taper evaluation and responses to the questionnaire were coded and entered into an Excel Spreadsheet file. Statistical analyses of the participants' responses were performed using the Chi-square test with P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: No significant difference was found between the educational levels relative to their responses to level of difficulty, sensitivity, skills, and technical demands for the four techniques. The intraoral mirror technique in the mandibular arch was found to be statistically significantly (P < 0.05) better. The surveyor technique in the maxillary arch was found to be statistically significantly (P < 0.05) better. The highest percentage of faculty members (50%) chose dental surveyor (DS) as the most preferred technique to be included into the academic curriculum. Conclusions: The DS was more favored among the respondents across all educational levels. This technique presented high potential in accurately evaluating tooth preparation in comparison to the intraoral techniques.

Keywords

Dental surveyor - hand piece - intra-oral mouth mirror - photographic mirror

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.




Publication History

Article published online:
01 November 2021

© 2020. European Journal of General Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Al-Omari WM, Al-Wahadni AM. Parallelism of abutment teeth on fixed partial dentures. Gen Dent 2009;57:444-7.
  • 2 The glossary of prosthodontic terms: Ninth Edition. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:e1-105.
  • 3 Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Jacobi R, Brackett SE. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 4th ed. USA: Quintessence Pub Co; 2012.
  • 4 Rosenstiel S, Land M, Fujimoto J. Contemporary Fixed Prosthodontics. 5th ed. USA: Mosby; 2015.
  • 5 el-Ebrashi MK, Craig RG, Peyton FA. Experimental stress analysis of dental restorations. IV. The concept of parallelism of axial walls. J Prosthet Dent 1969;22:346-53.
  • 6 Jørgensen KD. The relationship between retention and convergence angle in cemented veneer crowns. Acta Odontol Scand 1955;13:35-40.
  • 7 Jadhav V, Tambake SS, Patil V. Taper and relative parallelism of abutment teeth: A key to success in fixed partial dentures. Acta Sci Dent Sci 2018;2:44-8.
  • 8 Nordlander J, Weir D, Stoffer W, Ochi S. The taper of clinical preparations for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60:148-51.
  • 9 Vitsentzos SI. A new device to directly examine parallelism of abutment teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61:531-4.
  • 10 Netti CA, Skirvin DR, Phelan PR, Jones TK. A simplified intraoral surveying device. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:870-2.
  • 11 Lee H, So JS. A laser pointer surveyor to detect an undercut in fixed partial denture preparation. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:75-6.
  • 12 Farah RI. A chair-side technique to verify the parallelism of fixed partial denture abutments. Inte J Prosthodon Restor Dent 2016;6:21-23.
  • 13 AL-Moaleem MM, Ahmad M, Porwal A, Elamin EF, Al Shawkani HA, Quadri MF. Evaluation of tooth preparation by dental students in Jazan University during pre-clinical training. J Oral Health Dent Manag 2014;13:1166-70.
  • 14 Sayed ME, Busaily IA, Nahari RJ, Hakami RO, Maashi SM, Ramireddy NR. Evaluation of cast re-orientation on a dental surveyor using three tripod techniques: A survey and in vitro study. J Prosthodont 2018;27:700-7.
  • 15 DeCounter BL, Jacob RF, Scandrett FR. Accelerating plaster set using a controlled slurry water concentration. J Prosthet Dent 1982;47:340-1.
  • 16 Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Jacobi R, Brackett SE. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. India: Quintessence Pub Co; 1997.
  • 17 Ohm E, Silness J. The convergence angle in teeth prepared for artificial crowns. J Oral Rehabil 1978;5:371-5.
  • 18 Gold HO. Instrumentation for solving abutment parallelism problems in fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53:172-9.
  • 19 Bass EV, Kafalias MC. Controlled tooth and mouth preparation for fixed and removable prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1988;59:276-80.
  • 20 Dumbrigue HB, Gurun DC. Use of intraoral photography mirrors as aids for evaluating parallelism of multiple abutment preparations. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:95.
  • 21 Surathu N, Nasim I. Assessment of the use of a dental mouth mirror. IOSR-JDMS 2015;14:115-21.