UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, UK.
Portsmouth Dental Academy, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.
J Dent. 2020 Jun;97:103341. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103341. Epub 2020 Apr 26.
The aim of this study was to investigate UK dentists' working practices on shade taking and to assess whether these clinical practices are in accordance with evidence-based guidelines.
MATERIALS & METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out using a questionnaire designed to elicit quantitative and qualitative data. This included two clinical scenarios (vignettes), which required respondents to describe the steps they would take during shade taking and the prescription sent to the dental technician.
170 completed questionnaires were analyzed. 167 respondents (98.9 %) used manual methods for shade taking. 98 (57.6 %; 95% CI: 50 %, 65 %) respondents followed guidelines on the first vignette, 73 (42.9 %; 95% CI:35 %,51 %) followed guidelines on the second and 41(26.5 %; 95% CI:20 %,33 %) followed guidelines for both. Specialist Professional status (χ2= 10.76;p = 0.03) and more frequent use of daylight (χ2 = 6.09;p = 0.01) were both predictive of good practice. Qualitative data analyses revealed several themes: a) the time shade was taken, b) light source used, c) shades for different aspects of the tooth, d) dental care professional (DCP) opinion, and e) photographic support.
This study demonstrated that dentists needed to improve their shade taking techniques. A quarter of respondents consistently followed evidence-based good practice guidelines; the remaining three quarters undertook shade taking with a degree of chance and possibly guesswork, potentially generating errors in communication with dental laboratories, resulting in sub-optimal clinical outcomes. Appropriate training needs to be incorporated in the relevant dental curricula. This study highlighted the importance of compiling accurate and detailed laboratory prescriptions in relation to the shade of the restorations to be fabricated.
本研究旨在调查英国牙医在比色方面的工作实践,并评估这些临床实践是否符合循证指南。
采用问卷调查进行横断面研究,旨在获取定量和定性数据。该问卷包括两个临床场景(病例),要求受访者描述在比色过程中采取的步骤以及发送给牙科技师的处方。
共分析了 170 份完成的问卷。167 名受访者(98.9%)使用手动方法进行比色。98 名(57.6%;95%CI:50%,65%)受访者遵循了第一个病例的指南,73 名(42.9%;95%CI:35%,51%)受访者遵循了第二个病例的指南,41 名(26.5%;95%CI:20%,33%)遵循了两个病例的指南。专家专业地位(χ2=10.76;p=0.03)和更频繁地使用自然光(χ2=6.09;p=0.01)均与良好实践相关。定性数据分析揭示了几个主题:a)比色时间,b)光源使用,c)牙齿不同方面的比色,d)牙科保健专业人员(DCP)意见,以及 e)摄影支持。
本研究表明,牙医需要改进他们的比色技术。四分之一的受访者始终遵循基于证据的良好实践指南;其余四分之三的受访者在比色时带有一定的机会和猜测,可能会在与牙科实验室的沟通中产生错误,导致临床效果不理想。相关牙科课程中需要纳入适当的培训。本研究强调了在与要制作的修复体的色调相关的实验室处方中准确和详细地记录的重要性。