Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Practice and Preference of Tooth Notation Systems Among the General Dental Practitioners in Vadodara City

Parth Joshi, Rameshwari Raol, Yasheshvini Raol

Abstract


Introduction: There are several different tooth notation systems used by dentists for associating data to a selected tooth. Several types amongst them can be named as Universal system, Bosworth system, Navy system, World dental federation system, Zsigmondy and Palmer system and Federation Dentaire Internationale (FDI). But there is no single tooth notation system used worldwide. All notation systems introduced up to now are used as per native wants and convenience. Aim: To assess the knowledge and practice of tooth notation system among the general dental practitioners in Vadodara city. Method: 100 private dental practitioners registered with the IDA (Indian Dental Association), Vadodara City were randomly selected using lottery method. After personally explaining the objectives of the study, an informed consent was obtained from the dentist. A self-prepared questionnaire comprising of 12 close ended questions (pre validated by 10 dental private practitioners) were distributed to those who were willing to participate for the study. The responses were collected after 1 week. Result: In this study we found that dental practitioners generally prefer the FDI system but are not universally used. Clinicians who had <15 years’ experience, used the Palmer system of tooth notation. A common use of tooth notation will further facilitate ease of storage, and communication between peers, lab technicians, colleagues, dental schools etc. Conclusion: There would be merit in revisiting these findings to determine if practice will change in response to these findings. Also, a common use of tooth notation system should be implemented.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Al-Johany SS. Tooth Numbering System in Saudi Arabia: Survey. Saudi DentJ. 2016 Oct 31; 28(4): 183–8.

Ahlberg JE. We must get the numbers right. Fe ́de ́ration Dentaire Internationale Newsl. 1987; 158: 8–9.

Blinkhorn AS, Choi CL, Paget HE. An investigation into the use of the FDI tooth notation system by dental schools in the UK. Eur J Dent Educ. 1998; 2(1): 39–41.

Elderton RJ. Keeping up to date with tooth notation. Br Dent J. 1989; 166(7): 55–56.

Zsigmondy A. A practical method for rapidly noting dental observations and operations. Br J Dent Sci. 1874; 17: 580–582.

Turp JC, Alt KW. Designating teeth: the advantages of FDI’s two-digit system. Quintessence Int. 1995; 26(7): 501–504.

Proceeding of Dental Societies: American Dental Association. Description of C Palmer’s Dental notation. Dent Cosmos. 1870; 198.

Palmer C. Palmer’s dental notation. Dent Cosmos. 1891; 33: 194–198. 9. Frykholm KO, Lysell L. Different system for the recording of teeth and teeth surface. Int Dent J. 1962; 12: 194–207.

Lyons H. Committee adopts official methods for symbolic designation of teeth. J Am Dent Assoc. 1947; 34: 647.

O’Connor JT. Let’s really standardize our tooth numbering system. Oper Dent. 1983; 8(2): 73–74.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.37591/rrjod.v13i3.3089

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Research & Reviews: A Journal of Dentistry