- Email: [email protected]
On Implants and Dentures
of dental student life, relieve stress and reduce the need for time-consuming extracurricular iobs. A foundation-supported grant program for dental practice start-up th a t could help new graduates get their practices off the ground. ■* A National Dental Service Award, allowing selected students to pay back educa tional grants by providing dental care in underserved areas. Locations would be designated by the profession, not the federal government. ■■ Technology-transfer programs th a t would facilitate extension of educational services to individual dental practices using satellites, fiberoptics, computer networks and other state-of-the-art communi cation systems—an innovative approach to continuing dental education made possible
LETTERS ADA welcomes letters from readers on topics of current interest in dentistry. The Journal reserves the right to edit all communications and requires th a t all letters be typed, double spaced and signed. The views expressed are those of the letter writer and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or official policy of the Association. Brevity is appreciated. MEDIATION/ARBITRATION ENDORSED
I was pleased to see the article “Arbitration: How to Use it in D entistry” by Dr. Harry 1292
JADA, Vol. 125, October 1994
through the Health Foundation. These and other worthwhile programs have not been made available through other foun dations or government agencies. The ADAHF agenda promises to be truly pioneering and exciting. But building a foundation port folio of education and research programs capable of satisfying current needs will require a major infusion of funds. While few dentists are actively seeking new charitable interests to support, the Health Foundation provides a direct route of contribution to those who believe: “Dentistry has been good to me. And now is the time for me to help dentistry.” The ADAHF is uniquely positioned to recognize and honor those interested in offering a gift. No donation is too small. A $25 contribution from ju st two-thirds of the ADA membership would generate
more than $2.5 million—a substantial nest egg from which to initiate programming. State and local dental societies and related dental groups will find th a t cultivating relationships with the ADAHF can be mutually beneficial. Dentistry also has been good to those who make their living manufacturing and selling dental products. We hope th a t those in the dental trades and manufacturing—and in supporting industries as well— will recognize the rewards they stand to gain by investing in dentistry’s future. If dentistry has been good to you, consider becoming an active contributor to the ADA Health Foundation. If the majority of us participate now, our efforts will help ensure th a t those who follow will also be able to say: “Dentistry has been good to me.” ■
H arcsztark and George H. Friedman (June JADA). Media tion and arbitration are some of the best and, unfortunately, most underutilized tools available to dentists to thw art malpractice lawsuits. We have been recommending for many years th a t our dentists use mediation/arbitration agreements. We have seen a more than 98 percent success rate over the past several years in solving disputes through mediation. In many cases the dentist-patient relationship has even been preserved. I have heard several plaintiffs attorneys express vehement disdain over our practice recom mending use of mediation/arbi tration agreements such as those discussed in the article. We see attorneys literally drop out of
sight when we point out that their potential client has signed such an agreement, effectively giving the attorneys a position of impotence. I heartily endorse the concept of mediation and arbitration and hope th a t your readers realize the usefulness of this valuable practice management tool. Indeed, this article was the best so far in your practice management series. R ichard C. Engar, D.D.S. P rofessional Insurance E xchange Salt Lake City ON IMPLANTS AND DENTURES
Notwithstanding the fact th a t Dr. Gordon J. Christensen (“The Most Needed Application for Dental Implants,” June JADA)
LETTERS is understandably a national treasure as far as dentistry is concerned, some of his statem ents bear scrutiny in the interest of objectivity. It is doubtful th a t most complete denture therapists would agree with Dr. Christen sen’s inclusion of “most eden
tulous mandibles” and “some edentulous maxillas” as “clinical conditions not well-served through traditional therapy.” The fact th a t a patient does poorly with a set of dentures may not be as much a reflection on “traditional therapy” as it is upon the skill of the therapist.
A Q u e s t i o n For D e n t i s t s :
W h at is e d u c a t io n a l , RECREATIONAL, MOTIVATIONAL and TAX-DEDUCTIBLE? T h e A n s w e r Is:
DENTAL R.E.S.T. The first bimonthly educational & recreational newsletter for dentists! • Provides complete, comprehensive dental course listings • Highlights recreational areas and seminar resorts • Covers the entire United States, by region, at a glance • Includes highlights on international courses • Updates hundreds of courses in every issue DENTAL R.E.S.T. is written by a dentist for the dentist! This publication offers a unique opportunity to coordinate both educational and recreational goals. DENTAL R. E.S.T. is clean, clear and concise — a must for every dentist! ORDER NOW! It’s time to begin planning for your future educational and recre ational needs.
Call: 1-800-893-R.E.S.T. or FAX 707-935-7383 VISA and MASTERCARD accepted or send $48 for one year’s subscription to:
D EN TA L R e c r e a t io n
• E d u c a t io n
P.O. Box 1368
•
• S e m in a r s • T r a v e l
Sonoma, CA 95476
To condemn “traditional ther apy” because of the failure of a set of dentures th a t are not in the Romeo class (a peer review term designating the highest care) is unfair and misleading. We have all seen the patient who did poorly with Dr. A’s dentures, but was thrilled with Dr. B’s dentures. Would not condemning “traditional ther apy” after Dr. A’s failure be prem ature and wrong? To say “Most patients with traditional lower dentures barely tolerated them” is not so, unless we are speaking of non-Romeo den tures. It is true of some lower dentures th at patients “cannot use them a t all,” but an exam ination of these would in most cases reveal th a t they were not Romeo dentures. Also, keep in mind Dr. George Zarb’s admonition (JPD, June 1983, p. 828): “Denture wearing is a m atter of skilled performance,” so there is the very rare person with such poor coordination th a t he or she can not do well with dentures. Dr. Christensen’s sequence of options states th a t “implants should be first priority trea t ment plans” and if the patient “will not accept implants, only then should the less successful standard complete denture therapy be suggested.” This might make the public feel th a t they cannot be helped without implants, which is not true. Furthermore, this emphasis on the more costly modality can be easily m isinter preted. It would serve dentistry and the public better by reversing the order of the therapeutic options. Jerom e E. Safarik, D.D.S. Fullerton, Calif. Ju liu s J. Kovats, D.D.S., M.D. Burbank, Calif.
LETTERS ADA welcomes letters from readers on topics of current interest in dentistry. The Journal reserves the right to edit all communications and requires th a t all letters be typed, double spaced and signed. The views expressed are those of the letter writer and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or official policy of the Association. Brevity is appreciated. MEDIATION/ARBITRATION ENDORSED
I was pleased to see the article “Arbitration: How to Use it in D entistry” by Dr. Harry 1292
JADA, Vol. 125, October 1994
through the Health Foundation. These and other worthwhile programs have not been made available through other foun dations or government agencies. The ADAHF agenda promises to be truly pioneering and exciting. But building a foundation port folio of education and research programs capable of satisfying current needs will require a major infusion of funds. While few dentists are actively seeking new charitable interests to support, the Health Foundation provides a direct route of contribution to those who believe: “Dentistry has been good to me. And now is the time for me to help dentistry.” The ADAHF is uniquely positioned to recognize and honor those interested in offering a gift. No donation is too small. A $25 contribution from ju st two-thirds of the ADA membership would generate
more than $2.5 million—a substantial nest egg from which to initiate programming. State and local dental societies and related dental groups will find th a t cultivating relationships with the ADAHF can be mutually beneficial. Dentistry also has been good to those who make their living manufacturing and selling dental products. We hope th a t those in the dental trades and manufacturing—and in supporting industries as well— will recognize the rewards they stand to gain by investing in dentistry’s future. If dentistry has been good to you, consider becoming an active contributor to the ADA Health Foundation. If the majority of us participate now, our efforts will help ensure th a t those who follow will also be able to say: “Dentistry has been good to me.” ■
H arcsztark and George H. Friedman (June JADA). Media tion and arbitration are some of the best and, unfortunately, most underutilized tools available to dentists to thw art malpractice lawsuits. We have been recommending for many years th a t our dentists use mediation/arbitration agreements. We have seen a more than 98 percent success rate over the past several years in solving disputes through mediation. In many cases the dentist-patient relationship has even been preserved. I have heard several plaintiffs attorneys express vehement disdain over our practice recom mending use of mediation/arbi tration agreements such as those discussed in the article. We see attorneys literally drop out of
sight when we point out that their potential client has signed such an agreement, effectively giving the attorneys a position of impotence. I heartily endorse the concept of mediation and arbitration and hope th a t your readers realize the usefulness of this valuable practice management tool. Indeed, this article was the best so far in your practice management series. R ichard C. Engar, D.D.S. P rofessional Insurance E xchange Salt Lake City ON IMPLANTS AND DENTURES
Notwithstanding the fact th a t Dr. Gordon J. Christensen (“The Most Needed Application for Dental Implants,” June JADA)
LETTERS is understandably a national treasure as far as dentistry is concerned, some of his statem ents bear scrutiny in the interest of objectivity. It is doubtful th a t most complete denture therapists would agree with Dr. Christen sen’s inclusion of “most eden
tulous mandibles” and “some edentulous maxillas” as “clinical conditions not well-served through traditional therapy.” The fact th a t a patient does poorly with a set of dentures may not be as much a reflection on “traditional therapy” as it is upon the skill of the therapist.
A Q u e s t i o n For D e n t i s t s :
W h at is e d u c a t io n a l , RECREATIONAL, MOTIVATIONAL and TAX-DEDUCTIBLE? T h e A n s w e r Is:
DENTAL R.E.S.T. The first bimonthly educational & recreational newsletter for dentists! • Provides complete, comprehensive dental course listings • Highlights recreational areas and seminar resorts • Covers the entire United States, by region, at a glance • Includes highlights on international courses • Updates hundreds of courses in every issue DENTAL R.E.S.T. is written by a dentist for the dentist! This publication offers a unique opportunity to coordinate both educational and recreational goals. DENTAL R. E.S.T. is clean, clear and concise — a must for every dentist! ORDER NOW! It’s time to begin planning for your future educational and recre ational needs.
Call: 1-800-893-R.E.S.T. or FAX 707-935-7383 VISA and MASTERCARD accepted or send $48 for one year’s subscription to:
D EN TA L R e c r e a t io n
• E d u c a t io n
P.O. Box 1368
•
• S e m in a r s • T r a v e l
Sonoma, CA 95476
To condemn “traditional ther apy” because of the failure of a set of dentures th a t are not in the Romeo class (a peer review term designating the highest care) is unfair and misleading. We have all seen the patient who did poorly with Dr. A’s dentures, but was thrilled with Dr. B’s dentures. Would not condemning “traditional ther apy” after Dr. A’s failure be prem ature and wrong? To say “Most patients with traditional lower dentures barely tolerated them” is not so, unless we are speaking of non-Romeo den tures. It is true of some lower dentures th at patients “cannot use them a t all,” but an exam ination of these would in most cases reveal th a t they were not Romeo dentures. Also, keep in mind Dr. George Zarb’s admonition (JPD, June 1983, p. 828): “Denture wearing is a m atter of skilled performance,” so there is the very rare person with such poor coordination th a t he or she can not do well with dentures. Dr. Christensen’s sequence of options states th a t “implants should be first priority trea t ment plans” and if the patient “will not accept implants, only then should the less successful standard complete denture therapy be suggested.” This might make the public feel th a t they cannot be helped without implants, which is not true. Furthermore, this emphasis on the more costly modality can be easily m isinter preted. It would serve dentistry and the public better by reversing the order of the therapeutic options. Jerom e E. Safarik, D.D.S. Fullerton, Calif. Ju liu s J. Kovats, D.D.S., M.D. Burbank, Calif.