Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (8)
The questionnaire revealed several creative steps, based on laboratory considerations, being taken to prevent veneer chipping and fractures, a frequent and problematic prosthetic complication (Q12) (Figure 7). Technicians were taking into account metal (including zirconia) coping designs (36.3%), covering only the distal-most part of the molar region with metal (24%), using veneering composite resin (15.7%), and using metal occlusal designs (15.1%).
The type of coping is important in preventing veneer fractures, and it is necessary to secure adequate veneering material thickness and to consider the dispersion of stress. Particularly as zirconia becomes more common, there has been a move to improve coping designs using CAD/CAM and to exercise care concerning the prevention of veneering porcelain fracture. Responses to this survey support the idea that this concept has been gaining popularity among technicians in recent years.
Conversely, it was not expected that 15.7% of respondents would indicate that they use composite resin to prevent veneering material fractures. Moreover, there is no evidence that veneering composites are more resistant to fracture than porcelain (as they are more prone to chipping). As noted above, veneering composites are often used in Japan, and one theory is that this trend is driven by a conceptual assumption that veneering composites are softer than porcelain and less likely to fracture from a materials science standpoint. It can be concluded that the ability to repair prostheses directly in the mouth is also a deciding factor.
More than half of all repair requests for IODs (i.e., complications) (Q13) (Figure 8) involve fracturing of the denture base or denture tooth detachment (53.8% of all repair requests). The questionnaire also revealed that reconstruction of occlusion because of wear or attrition of denture teeth (24.1%) is a frequent issue leading to laboratory orders.
Serial posts:
- Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan
- Background : Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (1)
- Background : Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (2)
- Methods : Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan
- Table 1 Conditions characterizing implant laboratories
- Table 2 Implant fixed prostheses
- Table 3 Implant overdentures (IODs)
- Table 4 Prosthetic complications
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (1)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (2)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (3)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (4)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (5)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (6)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (7)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (8)
- Result & discussion: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan (9)
- Conclusions: Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan
- Figure 1. The proportions of abutments used with cement-retained prostheses
- Figure 2. Types of materials used to make implant prostheses in the anterior region
- Figure 3. Types of implant fixed prostheses are used in the posterior region
- Figure 4. The proportions of attachment types used with IODs
- Figure 5. The main fabrication challenges faced
- Figure 6. the frequently received repair requests involving implant fixed prostheses
- Figure 7. Creative steps to prevent veneer fracture and chipping in the molar region
- Figure 8. What are the frequently received repair requests for IODs?
- Figure 9. Do you have any requests for dentists who practice implant treatment?