Dental Laboratory Production of Prosthetic Restorations in a Population in Sofia, Bulgaria: A Descriptive Study
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
International Journal of Dentistry
Volume 2010, Article ID 286192, 6 pages
doi:10.1155/2010/286192
Research Article
Dental Laboratory Production of Prosthetic Restorations in
a Population in Sofia, Bulgaria: A Descriptive Study
Nikola D. Damyanov,1 Dick J. Witter,2 Anneloes E. Gerritsen,2 and Nico H. J. Creugers2
1 Department of Prosthetic Dental Medicine, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University-Sofia, 1, Georgi Sofiiski Boulevard,
1431 Sofia, Bulgaria
2 Department of Oral Function and Prosthetic Dentistry, College of Dental Science, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre,
P.O. Box 9101, 6500HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Correspondence should be addressed to Nico H. J. Creugers,
Received 6 September 2010; Accepted 27 October 2010
Academic Editor: Michael E. Razzoog
Copyright © 2010 Nikola D. Damyanov et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.
Objective. To describe prosthodontic production related to mutilated dentitions in Sofia, Bulgaria. Methods. Prosthodontic
production from 5 dental laboratories was recorded during a 14-day period. Production was related to dentitions as noted
from casts. Dentitions were classified as edentulous, interrupted/reduced, slightly interrupted, shortened, and complete. The
representativeness of the laboratory sample was verified trough comparison with a Sofia population sample using proportions
of crowned or replaced teeth per dental region. Results. The total production consisted of 243 crowns, 16 post and cores, 82 fixed
dental prostheses, and 41 removable dentures. Proportions of crowned teeth were significantly different between the samples;
proportions of replaced teeth were not. Of the 58 incomplete dentitions analyzed, 19 were restored to the level of completeness,
15 resulted in slightly interrupted, and 24 in shortened dentitions. Conclusions. Predominantly fixed restorations were provided to
restore mutilated dentitions to a functional level and not necessarily to complete dentitions.
1. Introduction
The demand for restorative treatment is generally triggered
by various oral conditions that affect masticatory performance, appearance, and psychological comfort [1]. When
tooth replacement is indicated, clinicians must decide which
of the available prosthetic restorations will meet patients’
demands at best. These restorations are fixed and removable
dental prostheses retained and supported by either natural
teeth or dental implants. As dental implants are not affordable for a vast majority of patients, the choice is often limited
to conventional tooth supported prostheses. In general, fixed
dental prostheses are preferred as they offer better function
and acceptance [2]. Nevertheless, when several teeth are
missing and financial means are limited, removable partial
dentures might be indicated. Thus, the decision-making
process is usually based on numerous clinical, subjective,
and economic considerations related to prevailing health care
systems [3, 4].
In Bulgaria, the health care system suffers from considerable financial inadequacy with a total expenditure on health
care of 4.3% of the gross domestic product (C132 per capita
per year including dentistry) [5, 6]. Financial limitations
in the health care system, together with other factors, are
expected to have a negative impact on the oral health of
the population. The scarce available data on the oral health
of the Bulgarian population indicated high prevalence of
missing permanent teeth ranging from 1.3 (20–24 years age
group), through 5.3 (35–44 years age group), to 13 (55–64
years age group) [7]. Since the prevalence of missing teeth is
substantial and (oral) health budget is restricted, it is crucial
that viable and appropriate management strategies, such as
the shortened dental arch concept, are utilized [8].
Being a minimal intervention approach, the shortened
dental arch concept advocates for a “wait and see” period of
monitoring function and stability of the dentition instead of
immediate replacement of absent molars [9]. Replacement
of absent molars with the sole purpose to restore dental
2
arch morphology irrespective of the degree of functional
impairment may be considered overtreatment.
Data on the prevalence of missing teeth, that indicate
the need for prosthodontic services, are generally available.
The same is not true for data on the provision of prosthetic
restorations. The latter can be used to appraise the effective
demand for prosthodontic care and to determine utilizable
treatment modalities. As part of a larger comprehensive
epidemiological study on oral function in reduced dentitions
and the feasibility of the shortened dental arch concept
within the existing health care system in Bulgaria, the
purpose of the present study was to explore prosthodontic
production as delivered by dental laboratories.
2. Material and Methods
2.1. Laboratory Sample. Five commercial dental laboratories
in the city of Sofia participated in the study. One of the
laboratories was considered small (2 technicians) and four
were of average size (4 to 10 technicians). Output from
these laboratories was considered representative for Sofia
because their clientele (10 to 40 dental practitioners per
laboratory) practiced widely in the city. The chief dental
technician of each laboratory was asked to record structured
information regarding the status of teeth from gypsum
casts and all restorations delivered during a two-week
period. Additionally, age and gender of patients as reported
by the dentists in charge and cost of each restoration,
produced were recorded. The teeth of the gypsum casts
were described as absent, present (including existing fixed
replacements), crown preparation/abutment, or as tooth
root. After accomplishment of the restoration the presence
or absence of occlusal contact for each tooth was recorded,
as well. For relating prosthetic restorations with dental arch
and dentition conditions, only sets of complete upper and
lower casts were considered. Dental arches (representing
either mandible or maxilla) were classified as edentulous,
interrupted (2 groups: interrupted/reduced and slightly
interrupted), shortened, or complete based on number and
type of teeth (Table 1). Dentitions (representing mandible
plus maxilla) were classified as edentulous (2 groups: one
jaw edentulous and both jaws edentulous), interrupted
(2 groups: interrupted/reduced and slightly interrupted),
shortened, or complete based on number and type of teeth,
and occluding regions (Table 1). Complete sets of casts were
assigned according to this classification before and after
accomplishment of the restorations.
A total of 284 laboratory orders were received, of which
33 were excluded due to various reasons (e.g., incompleteness of the registration form or no prosthodontic appli (...truncated)