One dark Monday in December, I thought to
myself, I cannot continue to practice dentistry as I am
doing, or I will go insane. A hat trick of laboratory
failures from three different labs was the reason.
One case was a single crown with an open distal
contact; this happens infrequently and I know the
lab will make the correction quickly. The second
case of the day was a custom shade from a local lab,
on a patient who is a family friend; the crowns on
8 and 9 looked like a single shade and did not
match the adjacent teeth. I always get patient feedback
before I share my opinion, and she nailed the
deficiencies in less than five seconds. The final
straw was an implant case with a total of three
implants (two together, one on the opposite side);
the abutment was rotated on the single implant
and the two custom abutments on the other side
were out of parallel by less than a degree.
Any one of those events would be taken in
stride as a day in the life of a dentist, but to have
three in one day left me searching for answers. I
am reluctant to blame the labs, but I can say that
the missing distal contact was evident on the
working model, the custom shade might have
been done by a technician who lacked the artistic
skills that I expected and the implant case was
probably mishandled by the individual who created
the model.
If you are reading this and you are a lab
owner considering writing a “letter to the
editor” that you plan to wrap around a
stone model and throw through my
window, please don’t. I am making a
point. Dentists frequently blame the lab
for poor outcomes and the labs frequently
blame the dentists for low quality
impressions and incomplete prescriptions.
Hygienists blame the thickness of
their X-ray sensor when they miss a contact,
assistants blame each other
when an instrument is broken
or missing and the front
office will blame the doctor
when the office is running
behind. The blame game is not limited to dentistry,
as parents today will blame teachers for their
children’s grades, referees are blamed when a team
is losing and everyone in Washington D.C. blames
each other for everything.
I don’t like the blame game. As a dentist, I
am cursed with the urge to do everything myself.
It stems from the adage that I learned from my
mother: “If you want something done right, do
it yourself.” It was this very thought coursing
through my brain on that dismal Monday that
made me think about CAD/CAM in the office.
This is certainly not the first time I have contemplated
this promising technology. In fact, I have
most of my lab restorations fabricated using
CAD/CAM and I am pleased with the accuracy
of fit. Labs are using this technology because they
also see it as a way to escape the blame game.
For many years, I have sat quietly on the sidelines
observing the various players in the marketplace.
CEREC has existed for 26 years, more
recently E4D, Cadent iTero, LAVA COS and others
have joined the mix. There are many more players
on the laboratory side of the business as well.
There are a number of factors in play that
lead me to believe we are on the verge of a
tremendous upswing in CAD/CAM adoption by
dentists. First, with the high price of precious
metal, labs are seeing a rapid increase in volume
of metal-free restorations. Second, newer materials
such as LAVA Ultimate do not require a furnace
prior to cementation; I would love to mill
my Class II composites and ditch the challenge of
interproximal contacts. Third, if labs are using
similar technology and the same materials to fabricate
my single units, I might as well do these
cases in the comfort of my office. Finally, technology
is the ultimate cure for the blame game; if
I prep, scan and design my restorations, the only
one left to blame is myself.
If you have recently purchased CAD/CAM for
your practice, send a report on your experiences to
tom@dentaltown.com. If you buy CAD/CAM in
2012, blame me.
|