Methods: All dental laboratories (n=28) listed in yellow pages were invited to complete a questionnaire that sought information regarding current methods used to communicate cast RPD Design, as well as dental technicians' attitudes toward their role in design decisions. Additionally, they were requested to examine RPD cases fabricated in the past 2 months and identify steps taken by dentists/dental technicians prior to fabrication of the framework. Data were analyzed using quantitative and descriptive statistics.
Results: 21(75%) dental laboratories accepted to participate, out of which 19 had the facilities to fabricate chrome-cobalt RPD. Cast RPD comprised approximately 4.04% (±2.67) of services provided. A reported 84.2% of dentists frequently communicate through generic lab script with 89.5% rarely/never giving details regarding RPD design. 100% agree/strongly agree that dentists frequently sent impressions but rarely/never sent surveyed go-by diagnostic casts. While 52.5% of labs agree/strongly agree that it is the dentist's responsibility to decide the final RPD design, 94.7% agree/strongly agree that dentists should depend on dental technicians for design making decisions. A total of 19 RPD cases were reviewed. All 19 were surveyed and designed by dental technicians but received dentist approval of design prior to fabrication. 13 (68.4%) had rest-seat preparations done by dentists after approval, and new impressions sent to lab. No other tooth modifications were noted.
Conclusion: The responsibility of RPD design appeared to be largely delegated to dental technicians. Importance of tooth modifications prior to framework fabrication seemed to be undervalued.