Maxillomandibular relationship philosophies for prosthodontic treatment: A survey of dental educators

Philip S Baker, Merle H Parker, John R. Ivanhoe, F. Michael Gardner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A variety of treatment philosophies persist concerning the need for coincidence of centric occlusion (CO) and maximum intercuspation (MI) in prosthodontic restoration; however, no consensus exists. The purpose of this study was to determine the philosophies of dental educators throughout the United States at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels and to compare their attitudes toward desirable maxillomandibular relationships in defined clinical situations. A survey was constructed with 5 clinical scenarios presented describing patients with a difference between maximum intercuspation and centric occlusion. The survey was mailed to 171 dentists involved in either predoctoral or postdoctoral dental programs in the United States; including 56 dental schools; the Army, Navy, and Air Force postdoctoral programs; 8 Department of Veterans Affairs postdoctoral programs; and 7 hospital-based programs. Descriptive statistics of the responses were provided. Chi-squared (α=.05) and Fisher's exact test analyses (α=.05) comparing predoctoral and postdoctoral program responses for each question were performed. Forty-three predoctoral dental school program responses were received. Forty-one postdoctoral program directors, including the dental school-based programs, 3 armed service branches, 2 Veterans Administration programs, and 1 hospital-based program responded to the survey. Fifteen respondents indicated that they represented both predoctoral and postdoctoral programs, and these data were deleted from the sample. Summarized results for each question reflect on whether the clinicians philosophically believed patients were better off with the elimination of an existing occlusal interference between MI and CO or not. There was no statistically significant difference seen between the predoctoral and postdoctoral responses. The controversy regarding the preferred mandibular position for treatment of dentulous and partially edentulous patients continues among dental educators at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels in the United States.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)86-90
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume93
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2005

Fingerprint

Prosthodontics
Dental Schools
Tooth
Dental Philosophies
United States Department of Veterans Affairs
Veterans
Therapeutics
Dentists
Consensus
Air
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Maxillomandibular relationship philosophies for prosthodontic treatment : A survey of dental educators. / Baker, Philip S; Parker, Merle H; Ivanhoe, John R.; Gardner, F. Michael.

In: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, Vol. 93, No. 1, 01.01.2005, p. 86-90.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Baker, Philip S ; Parker, Merle H ; Ivanhoe, John R. ; Gardner, F. Michael. / Maxillomandibular relationship philosophies for prosthodontic treatment : A survey of dental educators. In: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2005 ; Vol. 93, No. 1. pp. 86-90.
@article{7a0543f1e1204f749b6716c6b1ddf65c,
title = "Maxillomandibular relationship philosophies for prosthodontic treatment: A survey of dental educators",
abstract = "A variety of treatment philosophies persist concerning the need for coincidence of centric occlusion (CO) and maximum intercuspation (MI) in prosthodontic restoration; however, no consensus exists. The purpose of this study was to determine the philosophies of dental educators throughout the United States at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels and to compare their attitudes toward desirable maxillomandibular relationships in defined clinical situations. A survey was constructed with 5 clinical scenarios presented describing patients with a difference between maximum intercuspation and centric occlusion. The survey was mailed to 171 dentists involved in either predoctoral or postdoctoral dental programs in the United States; including 56 dental schools; the Army, Navy, and Air Force postdoctoral programs; 8 Department of Veterans Affairs postdoctoral programs; and 7 hospital-based programs. Descriptive statistics of the responses were provided. Chi-squared (α=.05) and Fisher's exact test analyses (α=.05) comparing predoctoral and postdoctoral program responses for each question were performed. Forty-three predoctoral dental school program responses were received. Forty-one postdoctoral program directors, including the dental school-based programs, 3 armed service branches, 2 Veterans Administration programs, and 1 hospital-based program responded to the survey. Fifteen respondents indicated that they represented both predoctoral and postdoctoral programs, and these data were deleted from the sample. Summarized results for each question reflect on whether the clinicians philosophically believed patients were better off with the elimination of an existing occlusal interference between MI and CO or not. There was no statistically significant difference seen between the predoctoral and postdoctoral responses. The controversy regarding the preferred mandibular position for treatment of dentulous and partially edentulous patients continues among dental educators at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels in the United States.",
author = "Baker, {Philip S} and Parker, {Merle H} and Ivanhoe, {John R.} and Gardner, {F. Michael}",
year = "2005",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.11.002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "93",
pages = "86--90",
journal = "Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry",
issn = "0022-3913",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Maxillomandibular relationship philosophies for prosthodontic treatment

T2 - A survey of dental educators

AU - Baker, Philip S

AU - Parker, Merle H

AU - Ivanhoe, John R.

AU - Gardner, F. Michael

PY - 2005/1/1

Y1 - 2005/1/1

N2 - A variety of treatment philosophies persist concerning the need for coincidence of centric occlusion (CO) and maximum intercuspation (MI) in prosthodontic restoration; however, no consensus exists. The purpose of this study was to determine the philosophies of dental educators throughout the United States at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels and to compare their attitudes toward desirable maxillomandibular relationships in defined clinical situations. A survey was constructed with 5 clinical scenarios presented describing patients with a difference between maximum intercuspation and centric occlusion. The survey was mailed to 171 dentists involved in either predoctoral or postdoctoral dental programs in the United States; including 56 dental schools; the Army, Navy, and Air Force postdoctoral programs; 8 Department of Veterans Affairs postdoctoral programs; and 7 hospital-based programs. Descriptive statistics of the responses were provided. Chi-squared (α=.05) and Fisher's exact test analyses (α=.05) comparing predoctoral and postdoctoral program responses for each question were performed. Forty-three predoctoral dental school program responses were received. Forty-one postdoctoral program directors, including the dental school-based programs, 3 armed service branches, 2 Veterans Administration programs, and 1 hospital-based program responded to the survey. Fifteen respondents indicated that they represented both predoctoral and postdoctoral programs, and these data were deleted from the sample. Summarized results for each question reflect on whether the clinicians philosophically believed patients were better off with the elimination of an existing occlusal interference between MI and CO or not. There was no statistically significant difference seen between the predoctoral and postdoctoral responses. The controversy regarding the preferred mandibular position for treatment of dentulous and partially edentulous patients continues among dental educators at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels in the United States.

AB - A variety of treatment philosophies persist concerning the need for coincidence of centric occlusion (CO) and maximum intercuspation (MI) in prosthodontic restoration; however, no consensus exists. The purpose of this study was to determine the philosophies of dental educators throughout the United States at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels and to compare their attitudes toward desirable maxillomandibular relationships in defined clinical situations. A survey was constructed with 5 clinical scenarios presented describing patients with a difference between maximum intercuspation and centric occlusion. The survey was mailed to 171 dentists involved in either predoctoral or postdoctoral dental programs in the United States; including 56 dental schools; the Army, Navy, and Air Force postdoctoral programs; 8 Department of Veterans Affairs postdoctoral programs; and 7 hospital-based programs. Descriptive statistics of the responses were provided. Chi-squared (α=.05) and Fisher's exact test analyses (α=.05) comparing predoctoral and postdoctoral program responses for each question were performed. Forty-three predoctoral dental school program responses were received. Forty-one postdoctoral program directors, including the dental school-based programs, 3 armed service branches, 2 Veterans Administration programs, and 1 hospital-based program responded to the survey. Fifteen respondents indicated that they represented both predoctoral and postdoctoral programs, and these data were deleted from the sample. Summarized results for each question reflect on whether the clinicians philosophically believed patients were better off with the elimination of an existing occlusal interference between MI and CO or not. There was no statistically significant difference seen between the predoctoral and postdoctoral responses. The controversy regarding the preferred mandibular position for treatment of dentulous and partially edentulous patients continues among dental educators at both the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels in the United States.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=11144233274&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=11144233274&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.11.002

DO - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.11.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 15624003

AN - SCOPUS:11144233274

VL - 93

SP - 86

EP - 90

JO - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

JF - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

SN - 0022-3913

IS - 1

ER -