Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Göteborg, Sweden.
Acta Odontol Scand. 2010 Nov;68(6):313-22. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2010.517412.
It is the aim of this paper to give a few examples of dogmas related to prosthodontics and oral implants and to discuss the controversial role of occlusion in the aetiology of temporomandibular disorders. New knowledge is developing at a rapidly increasing rate in dentistry, as in other areas of society. Our lecturers at university taught us many useful things. But, as time goes by, what is still relevant? Some methods are so well established that they deserve to be called dogmas. It is implied that a dogma is not supported by strong evidence, even though it has existed and been practised for a long time. In the era of evidence-based dentistry it is appropriate to scrutinize such issues. A review of the current literature indicates that conflicting opinions exist concerning a number of common procedures in clinical dentistry, mainly due to a scarcity of good studies with unambiguous results. There is therefore a need for more high-quality clinical research in attempting to reach the goal of evidence-based clinical practice. The dental community should take an active part in this process.
本文旨在举出一些与修复学和口腔种植体相关的教条，并讨论咬合在颞下颌关节紊乱病病因学中的争议性作用。正如社会其他领域一样，牙科学也在以前所未有的速度快速发展着新知识。我们在大学的讲师教给了我们许多有用的东西。但是，随着时间的推移，哪些是仍然相关的呢？有些方法已经如此成熟，以至于可以称之为教条。这意味着即使一个教条已经存在并长期实践，它也没有得到强有力的证据支持。在基于证据的牙科时代，仔细审查这些问题是合适的。对当前文献的回顾表明，在临床牙科的一些常见程序中存在相互矛盾的观点，主要是由于缺乏具有明确结果的高质量研究。因此，需要更多高质量的临床研究来努力实现基于证据的临床实践的目标。牙科界应该积极参与这一过程。
