Diş Hekimliği Öğrencilerinin Metal Seramik Kron Preparasyonlarının Total Okluzal Konverjans ve Basamak Genişliklerinin Dijital Olarak Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 67 - 72, 31.08.2022

Mehmet Esad Güven , Hümanur İnal

https://doi.org/10.51122/neudentj.2022.44

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, diş hekimliği fakültesi 2.sınıf öğrencilerinin preklinik şartlarında fantom model üzerinde hazırladıkları diş preparasyonlarının dijital olarak ölçülmesi, incelenmesi ve değerlendirilmesi ve değerlendirmeler sonucunda pratik eğitime katkı sağlamaktır.
Gereç ve yöntemler: Bu çalışmada, rastgele seçilmiş 20 farklı öğrenciye ait fantom çenelerdeki 360 diş preparasyonu kullanılmıştır. Bu çeneler ağız içi tarayıcı ile taranmıştır. Prepare edilen dişlerin total okluzal konverjans(TOC) açısı ve basamak genişliği dijital ortamda hesaplanmış ve değerlendirilmiştir.
Bulgular: Elde edilen sonuçlar değerlendirildiğinde, en yüksek TOC değeri alt molar dişlerin mesio-distalinde ve en düşük TOC değeri ise alt keser dişlerin mesio-distalinde ölçülmüştür. Basamak genişliklerine ait en yüksek değer alt premolar dişlerde, en düşük değer ise alt keser dişlerde ölçülmüştür.
Sonuç: Diş hekimliği öğrencilerinin hazırladığı preparasyonlardaki basamak genişliği ve TOC değerlerinin kabul edilebilir aralıkta olduğu hesaplanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Diş Preparasyonu, Total Okluzal Konverjans, Basamak Genişliği

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Proje Numarası

yok

Digital Evaluation of Total Occlusal Convergence and Margin Widths of Tooth Preparations for Metal Ceramic Crowns by Dental Students

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study is to digitally measure, examine and evaluate the tooth preparations prepared on the phantom model by the 2nd year dentistry students. To measure the buccal, lingual, mesial, distal margin width and mesio-distal, bucco-lingual total occlusal convergence (TOC) angle of the preparations used in the study and to compare them with the values in the literature.
Material and Methods: In this study, 360 tooth preparations in the phantom jaw of 20 randomly selected students were used. These jaws were scanned with an intraoral scanner. TOC angle and margin width of the prepared teeth were digitally measured and evaluated. One-way ANOVA and post-Hoc Benforoni test were used to compare the between groups. Confidence interval was taken as 95%. (p<0.05)
Results: When the obtained results were evaluated, the highest TOC value was measured in the mesio-distal of the lower molars, and the lowest TOC value was measured in the mesio-distal of the lower incisors. The highest value of the step widths was measured in the lower premolars, and the lowest value was measured in the lower incisors. When the mean margin width was evaluated, it was found that the mean margin width of the lower incisors was significantly lower than the other groups.
Conclusion: It was calculated that the margin width and TOC values in the preparations prepared by the dentistry students were in the acceptable range.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tooth preparation, Total occlusal convergence, Margin widths

Proje Numarası

yok

Kaynakça

• 1. Marghalani, T. Y. Convergence angles of metal ceramic crowns prepared by dental students. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2014;112:1250–1256.
• 2. Ram, H. K., Shah, R. J. & Agrawal, H. S. Evaluation of three different tooth preparation techniques for metal ceramic crowns by comparing preparation depths: An in vitro study. J. Indian Prosthodont. Soc. 2015;15:162–167.
• 3. Gözneli, R., Uludamar, A., Akalın Evren, B. & Kulak Özkan, Y. Metal üzerine preslenebilir seramik restorasyonlar ve klinik uygulamasi: olgu sunumu. Cumhur. Dent. J. 2012;15:55-62.
• 4. Hey, J., Schweyen, R., Kupfer, P. & Beuer, F. Influence of preparation design on the quality of tooth preparation in preclinical dental education. J Dent Sci 2017;12:27–32. 5. Akaltan, K. F. Diş Hekimliğinde Preklinik ve Klinik Eğitim Çeşitliliği. Selcuk Dent. J. 2019;6:37-51.
• 6. Seymour, K. G., Cherukara, G. P., Samarawickrama, D. Y. D. & Zou, L. Consistency of labial finish line preparation for metal ceramic crowns: an investigation of a new bur. J. Prosthodont. 2008;17:14–19.
• 7. Schwindling, F. S., Waldecker, M., Rammelsberg, P., Rues, S. & Bömicke, W. Tooth substance removal for ceramic single crown materials-an in vitro comparison. Clin. Oral Investig. 2019;23:3359–336.
• 8. Podhorsky, A., Rehmann, P. & Wöstmann, B. Tooth preparation for full-coverage restorations-a literature review. Clin. Oral Investig. 2015;19:959–968.
• 9. Whitworth, J. M., Walls, A. W. G. & Wassell, R. W. Crowns and extra-coronal restorations: endodontic considerations: the pulp, the root-treated tooth and the crown. Br. Dent. J. 2002;192:315–20, 323–7.
• 10. Camps, J., Déjou, J., Rémusat, M. & About, I. Factors influencing pulpal response to cavity restorations. Dent. Mater. 2000;16:432–440.
• 11. Hey, J., Schweyen, R., Kupfer, P. & Beuer, F. Influence of preparation design on the quality of tooth preparation in preclinical dental education. J Dent Sci 2017;12:27–32.
• 12. Shillingburg, H. T. & Sather, D. A. Fundamentals of Fixed Prosthodontics. (Quintessence Publishing Company, 2012).
• 13. Tiu j. Tooth Preparation – measuring, understanding, and reporting tooth preparation and its influence on fracture of all-ceramic crowns. University of Otago. Doctoral thesis. Dunedin, New Zealand, 2015.
• 14. The Glossary of Prosthodontic Terms: Ninth Edition. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2017;117:e1–e105.
• 15. Rosella, D. et al. A tooth preparation technique in fixed prosthodontics for students and neophyte dentists. Ann. Stomatol. 2015;6:104–109.
• 16. Ayad M, Maghrabi F, A. A. & Rosenstiel, S. F. Assessment of convergence angles of tooth preparations for complete crowns among dental students. J. Dent. 2005;33:633–638.
• 17. Mack, P. J. A theoretical and clinical investigation into the taper achieved on crown and inlay preparations. J. Oral Rehabil. 1980;7:255–265.
• 18. Jorgensen KD, (1955). The Relationship Between Retention and Convergence Angle in Cemented Veneer Crowns. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 1955;13: 35–40.
• 19. Aslan İ, Tuna SH, Tam Seramik Kron Preparasyonlarının Dijital Verilerinin İncelenmesi. Sdü Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2020;11:152-160.
• 20. Hunter AJ, Gingival crown margin configurations: A review and discussion. Part I: Terminology and widths. J Prosthet Dent. 1990;64: 548-552.
• 21. Winkelmeyer C, Wolfart S, Marotti J. Analysis of tooth preparations for zirconia-based crowns and fixed dental prostheses using stereolithography data sets. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116: 783-789.
• 22. Okuyama Y, Kasahara S, Kimura K. Quantitative evaluation of axial wall taper in prepared artificial teeth. Journal of Oral Science. 2005;4:129-133.
• 23. Khamas MY, Al-Rawi I, Saleh AA. Computer-Aided Measurement of Total Occlusal Convergence of Teeth Preparations for All-Ceramic Crowns by Dental Students. Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology, 2021;15:1744–1751.
• 24. Seymour K, Zou L, Samarawickrama DY, Lynch E. Assessment of shoulder dimensions and angles of porcelain bonded to metal crown preparations. J Prosthet Dent. 1996;75:406-11.
• 25. Esser C, Kerschbaum T, Winkelmann V, Krage T, Faber FJ. A comparison of the visual and technical assessment of preparations made by dental students. Eur J Dent Educ. 2006;10:157-61.