Institutes
Refine
Document Type
- Article (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- CAD/CAM (1)
- Finevo (1)
- OHIP-G14 (1)
- OHRQoL (1)
- attachment (1)
- ball (1)
- contamination (1)
- debris (1)
- dental academic degrees (1)
- dental educationcation (1)
- doctoral degrees (1)
- hybrid abutment (1)
- locator (1)
- monotype abutment (1)
- overdenture (1)
- planimetric measurement (1)
- postgraduate edu (1)
- ultrasonic cleaning (1)
Institute
- Medizin (3)
There are different avenues for obtaining postgraduate doctoral/Ph.D. degrees in Germany and abroad. Depending on their interests and career plans, candidates can choose a postgraduate doctorate/Ph.D. that focuses on a career in academia or a doctorate that does not involve all elements of a Ph.D. and is obtained for the title’s sake. Germany offers this type of diversity and flexibility, whereas the USA postgraduate doctorate model presents a more structured doctorate. The current article provides insight regarding various and more flexible pathways for obtaining a postgraduate doctorate by comparing the German and the American model. The diversity of academic degrees in dentistry and medicine, such as postgraduate doctoral degrees and the higher postdoctoral degrees available in Germany for graduates interested in academia, makes educational evaluation processes and credentials recognition challenging. The lack of transparency and a systematic approach for the academic acknowledgment of the different scientific values of each doctorate type is creating confusion, primarily when German postgraduate doctorate holders pursue academic careers internationally. The current article aims to enhance the knowledge about the different academic degrees and facilitate the educational evaluations, specialty applications, and employment processes. Understanding the additional scientific value of each doctorate type offered in Germany is imperative for their credential recognition internationally.
Locator® and ball attachments are well-established systems to attach overdentures to two inter-foraminal implants. This study aimed to evaluate differences between the two systems regarding prosthetic maintenance and patients' oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). Dental records of patients with a mandibular implant-retained overdenture were retrospectively analyzed. Prosthetic maintenance measures involving the denture suprastructure and attachment matrix and patrix were analyzed. Furthermore, the Oral Health Impact Profile-G14 (OHIP-G14) was used to evaluate OHRQoL. Results were analyzed by means of Kaplan–Meier analysis and Student's t- and log-rank tests. The records of 122 patients were evaluated. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis revealed a significant difference between ball attachments (Group B; n patients = 47) and Locator® attachments (Group L; n patients = 75) regarding the occurrence of denture fractures (p < 0.001) and events affecting the matrix (p = 0.028) and patrix (p = 0.030). Group L had a significantly lower total OHIP-G14 score than Group B (p = 0.002). The most common maintenance events were matrix-related and denture relining for both attachment systems. Group B required more maintenance measures than Group L. Moreover, patients in Group L had better OHRQoL than patients in Group B.
Manufacturing processes of custom implant abutments may contaminate their surfaces with micro wear deposits and generic pollutants. Such particulate debris, if not removed, might be detrimental and provoke inflammatory reactions in peri-implant tissues. Although regulatory guidelines for adequate cleaning, disinfection, or sterilization exist, there does not appear to be a consistent application and data on the amount and extent of such contaminants is lacking. The aim of the present in vitro study was to evaluate the quality and quantity of processing-related surface contamination of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) abutments in the state of delivery and after ultrasonic cleaning. A total of 28 CAD/CAM monotype and hybrid abutments were cleaned and disinfected applying a three-stage ultrasonic protocol (Finevo protocol). Before and after cleaning, the chemical composition and the contamination of the abutments were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), dispersive X-ray spectroscopy(EDX),andcomputer-aidedplanimetricmeasurement(CAPM).Inthedeliverycondition, monotype abutments showed a significantly higher amount of debris compared to hybrid abutments (4.86±6.10% vs. 0.03 ± 0.03%, p < 0.001). The polishing process applied in the laboratory after bonding the hybrid abutment components reduces the surface roughness and thus contributes substantially to their purity. The extent of contamination caused by computer-aided manufacturing of custom abutments can be substantially minimized using a three-stage ultrasonic protocol.