and CE… · Web viewIf in metal: Occlusion was checked for proper stable tripod occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation and no occlusal interferences in all excursions. * Necessary

Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics

MPEs and CEs for the Fixed Prosthodontics courses Points system was not applied for the 5th year as decided by

the division. Evaluation criteria were added in the forms to ease the

evaluation process. Grades will be calculated by adding the evaluation points

from each step divided by the total maximum number multiplied by100 (percentage).


OMR 434-Preclinical fixed prosthodontics MPEs (4th year):

MPE Numbers required

Due wee

kMPE forms

1. Full metal veneer crown preparation:

Mandibular 1st or 2nd molar.Maxillary 1st or 2nd molar.

22

Thro

ugho

ut th

e ye

ar

Full metal crown preparation

2. Metal-ceramic posterior crown preparation:

Mandibular premolar.Maxillary premolar.Mandibular 1st molar.Maxillary 1st molar.

1212

Posterior Metal-ceramic preparation

3. Metal-ceramic anterior crown preparation:

Maxillary central incisor 1Anterior Metal-ceramic

preparation

4. Anterior all-ceramic crown preparation:

Maxillary central incisor 2Anterior All-ceramic

preparation5. Custom tray on study model 1 Custom Tray6. Provisional restoration 1 Provisional Restorations7. Resin pattern post and core 1 Custom Post and Core8. Wax pattern 1 Wax pattern


OMR 434-Preclinical fixed prosthodontics CEs (4th year):CE* Due week

1. Full metal veneer crown preparation

13 -14 (1st and 2nd

semesters)2. Posterior Metal-ceramic crown

preparation13 -14 (1st and 2nd

semesters)3. Special tray 13 -14 (1st semesters)4. Provisional Restorations 13 -14 (1st semesters)5. Wax pattern 13 -14 (2nd semesters)

*CE forms are similar to MPE forms


OMR 534-Clinical fixed prosthodontics MPEs (5th year):

MPE

Numbers

required

Due week MPE forms

1. Examination, Diagnosis and Treatment planning 3

Thro

ugho

ut th

e ye

ar

Under development

2. Custom Post and Core + Crown* 1 Custom Post

and Core3. Pre-fabricated Post and

Core + Crown* 1 Pre-fabricated Post and Core

4. 3-unit Fixed Dental Prosthesis (FDP)* 1 See below

5. Provisional restoration for 3-unit FDP (on simulator) 1 Provisional

Restorations6. Laminate veneer (on

simulator) 1 Laminate Veneer

7. Resin-bonded FDP (on simulator) 1 Resin Bonded

FDP

* MPE forms are available for each step as following: Cast mounting Custom Tray Teeth preparation (for FDP, each preparation will be assessed

individually and then for common path of insertion)o Full metal crown preparation o Posterior metal-ceramic preparation o Anterior metal-ceramic preparation o Anterior all-ceramic prepara tion

Provisional Restorations Final impression Metal try-in Porcelain try-in Trial cementation Final cementation


OMR 534-Clinical fixed prosthodontics CEs (5th year):

CE*

Numbers

required

Due week

1. Provisional restoration for 3-unit FDP (on simulator) 1 13 -14 (1st semesters)

2. Examination, Diagnosis and treatment planning for a case 1 8-9 (2nd semesters)

3. Crown preparation on patient 1 8-9 (2nd semesters)4. Provisional restoration for a

crown on patient 1 8-9 (2nd semesters)

5. Laminate veneer (on simulator) 1 13 -14 (2nd semesters)

6. Resin-bonded FDP (on simulator) 1 13 -14 (2nd semesters)

*CE forms are similar to MPE forms


CCC 600 - Comprehensive Care Clinic (6th year)

Students are required to collect 30 points from the following MPEs

MPE Points1. Crown 52. Laminate veneer 43. Cast post and core* 44. Prefabricated post and core* 35. Resin-bonded FDP 56. 3-unit FDP** 10* Must be covered by crown.** Mandatory

CEs

CE*

Numbers

required

Due week

1. Abutment preparation on patient (preferably for FDP) 2 8-9 (2nd semesters)

2. Final impression 1-2* 8-9 (2nd semesters)

3. Delivery of the final restoration and follow-up 1-2* 13 -14 (1st semesters)

* Depending on the clinical scenario, if both preparations could be taken by one or two separate impressions.

Casts Mounting’s Evaluation CriteriaArea of Grading

C R I T E R I AProficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)

Accuracy Recording all the soft and hard tissue

accurately. Casts free of voids or air bubbles

Some of the details are missing in non-significant areas

Few voids and/or air bubbles

Some of the details are missing in significant areas

Significant amount of voids and/or air bubbles

Base

Base should be of adequate height Base trimmed properly

________ Base is very thin or very thick. Base is not trimmed properly

Articulator Setting

Condylar inclination= 30° Bennett angle =15°, Incisal pin is on zero when it is touching

the incisal table*. The condylar element should be in the

most posterior position*.

One or both condylar setting were not set properly.

Incisal pin is on zero when it is touching the incisal table*.

The condylar element should be in the most posterior position*.

Incisal pin is not on zero when it is touching the incisal table*.

The condylar element is not in the most posterior position*.

Maxillary Cast Mounting

Face bow attached to the articulator properly*

Maxillary cast correctly seated on bitefork registration*

Mounting plaster should engage undercuts in the base of the cast and the mounting plate

________ Face bow is not attached to the articulator properly*

Maxillary cast is not correctly seated on bitefork registration*

Mounting plaster is not engaging undercuts in the base of the cast and the mounting plate

Mandibular Casts Mounting

Teeth are fully seated in interocclusal record*.

Mandibular casts is mounted in the proper centric position*.

________ Teeth are not fully seated in interocclusal record*, and/or

Mandibular casts is not mounted in the proper centric position*.

Neatness Articulator is clean without remnants of

plaster attached to the articulator members.

Mounting plaster is neat and smooth.

Articulator is clean with remnants of plaster attached to the articulator members.

Mounting plaster is slightly rough.

Articulator is not clean with significant amount of remnants of plaster attached to the articulator members.

Mounting plaster is significantly rough


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormCasts Mounting

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name

Patient’s File No.

Computer No. Pre-op approval

Serial No. Tooth No.

Ethical conduct and professionalism

Yes No

Student shows respect towards staff, patients, and colleagues, student follows faculty directives, student wears appropriate professional attire, presents only his/her work (no cheating)

Infection control Yes No

Surfaces are clean, no visible littering, disinfected, properly wrapped

Communication skills Yes No

Student communicates efficiently with patient and instructor using clear words and logical sequence

Knowledge Yes NoStudent knows the principles of the procedure and material selection and answers instructor’s questions correctly with justification

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient

Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria

Student self-

evaluation

Instructor evaluation Feedback

0 1 2 0 1 2

Accuracy Recording all the soft and hard

tissue accurately. Casts free of voids or air bubbles

Base Base should be of adequate height Base trimmed properly

Articulator Setting

Condylar Inclination= 300

Lateral =150, Incisal= 00

The condylar element should be in the most posterior position*.

Maxillary Cast Mounting

Face Bow Attached to Articulator Properly*

Maxillary cast correctly seated

on bitefork registration* Mounting plaster should engage

undercuts in the base of the cast and the mounting plate

Mandibular Casts Mounting

Teeth are fully seated in interocclusal record

Mandibular Casts Mounted in Maximum Intercuspation Position*

Incisal Guide Pin Incisal Guide Pin in Contact with

Anterior Table and flush with articulator’s upper compartment

Neatness

Total

Note:- Steps with (*) marks are CRITICAL MINI- STEPS. This clinical procedure will not be

considered an MPE if you score ZERO in any one of them

Accepted as MPE Faculty Stamp and Signature Date

Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form # 4

Custom Tray's Evaluation CriteriaArea of Grading


1. Spacing Even space along the tray that permits an even impression thickness of 2-3 mm

Uneven space in some areas along the tray

Improper thickness (less than 2 mm)

No space

2. Stoppers and Stability

3 stoppers:- Tripodal arrangement- On non-centric cusps of teeth

not to be prepared- 2x2 mm dimensions

Stable on the cast

Only 2 stoppers with proper size and location or 3 stoppers but with improper size, distribution or location.

Stable on the cast

Less than 2 stoppers Lack of stability.

3. Peripheral Extension

Extended about 5 mm cervical to the gingival margins of the teeth.

Shaped properly to allow for frenum attachments

Peripheries minimally over/under extended along few areas of the margins of the teeth (+/- 2mm)

Shaped properly for frenum attachments

Peripheries under or over extended (more than 7 mm or less than 3mm from the gingival margins of the teeth)

Unrelieved at frenum attachments4. Smoothn

ess & Thickness

Smooth with no sharp edges along all the tray margin

Have consistent thickness of 2-3 mm

Slightly rough with few localized areas of sharp edges.

Uneven thickness along parts of the tray.

Rough and irregular surfaces with multiple areas of sharp edges

Uneven thickness and perforation in some places.

5. Handle Handle is at right angle on the occlusal plane and doesn’t

Handle is not at right angle with the occlusal plane but doesn’t

No handle. Handle interferes with the lip.

interfere with the lip. Even thickness along the handle

and at the connection with the tray

interfere with the lip. Uneven thickness along handle

and bulky connection with the tray.

Very thick or very thin handle.


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormCustom Tray

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2Spacing Even space along the tray

that permits an even impression thickness of 2-3 mm

Stoppers and Stability

Three stoppers*:- Tripodal arrangement- On non centric cusps of

teeth not to be prepared

- 2x2 mm dimensions Stable on the cast

Peripheral Extended about 5 mm cervical to the gingival

Extension margins Shaped properly to allow

for frenum attachments

Smoothness & Thickness

Smooth with no sharp edges along all the tray

Rigid and have consistent thickness of 2-3 mm*

Handle Handle is at right angle on the occlusal plane

Even thickness along handle and connection with the tray

Total




Yes No


All Metal Preparation's Evaluation CriteriaArea of Grading C R I T E R I A

PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1. OCCLUSA

L REDUCTION

Adequate Reduction Clearance*a) Functional cusps bevel

1.5 mmb) Non-functional cusps

1.0 mmc) Central Groove

1.0 mm Uniform and retains original contour

Inadequate reduction, alterations are possible to obtain desired reduction, or slight over-reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal)

Follow contour but not uniform

Inadequate reduction (tooth still in contact or no clearance) or over reduced to point of exposure

Flat surface, or not following original contour

2. AXIAL SURFACE REDUCTION (Baccul & Lingual)

Adequate reduction buccally and lingual 1 mm Cervical 1/3 of facial and lingual surface

converges occ. (6-10°) Buccal surface demonstrates 2 planes Rounded line angles No undercuts*

Under-reduction (< 1 mm)

Angle of convergence (>10° or <20°)

One plane (minimally converging) Sharp line angle No undercuts

Lack of reduction or extensive to the point of exposure

Converging more than 20°

One plane (severely converging)

Presence of undercuts.

3. PROXIMAL REDUCTION

Adequate wall convergence (6-100)

Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm*

No damage to adjacent teeth No undercuts*

Angle of convergence (>100 or <200)

Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm

Minimal scratches on adjacent tooth No undercuts

Excessive convergence to point of exposure or converging more than 20°

Proximal contact not opened.

Extensive damage to adjacent teeth Presence of undercuts.

4. FINSIH LINE

Type: Chamfer (buccal & lingual) Width: Chamfer (0.4-0.7 mm)

Smooth and continuous finish line.*

Finish line position: 0.5 mm supragingivally (for preclinical)

Finish line position is appropriate for the case (for clinical cases).

Type: Chamfer (buccal & lingual) Detectable narrow finish line or slightly wide

(up to 1mm) Slight irregularity & roughness in the finish

line Finish line position: Equigingival, up to 1mm

supragingivally (for preclinical)


Wrong design (type) Too wide (>1mm) or undetectable finish

line. Significant irregularity and roughness.

Finish line position: more than 1mm supragingivally or subgingival (for preclinical)

Finish line position is not appropriate for the case (for clinical cases).

Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed

ProsthodonticsMinimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form

All Metal Crown Preparation

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2

Occlusal Reduction

Adequate Reduction Clearance*a. Functional cusps bevel

1.5 mmb. Non-functional cusps

1 mmc. Central Groove

1mm Uniform and retains original contour

Buccal & Lingual Reduction*

Adequate reduction buccally and lingual 1 mm

Cervical 1/3 of facial and lingual surface converges occ. (6-10°)

Buccal surface demonstrates 2 planes Rounded line angles No undercuts*

Proximal Reduction

Adequate wall convergence (6-100) Proximal contact opened with adjacent

teeth by 0.5 mm* No damage to adjacent teeth No undercuts*

Finish Line

Type: Chamfer (buccal & lingual) Width: Chamfer (0.4-0.7 mm) Smooth and continuous finish line



Total

Note:- Steps with (*) marks are CRITICAL MINI-STEPS. This clinical procedure will not be

considered an MPE if you score ZERO in any one of them- Additionally, the procedure will not be considered an MPE if you perform one of the

following:1. Unjustifiable over reduction to a point of exposure2. Damage to adjacent tooth involving the dentin


Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form # 2a

Posterior Metal – Ceramic Preparation's Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading C R I T E R I A

PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1. OCCLUSA

L REDUCTION

Adequate Reduction Clearance*a) Functional cusps bevel

1.5-1.7 mmb) Non-functional cusps

1.3-1.7 mm for maxillary0.8-1.2 mm for mandibular

c) Central Groove1.5 mm

Uniform and retains original contour

Inadequate reduction, alterations are possible to obtain desired reduction, or slight over-reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal).

Follow contour but not uniform

Inadequate reduction (tooth still in contact or no clearance) or

Over reduced to point of exposure

Flat surface, or not following original contour

2. AXIAL SURFACE REDUCTION (Buccal & Lingual)

Adequate reduction buccally 1.5 mm, lingually 1 mm

Cervical 1/3 of buccal and lingual surfaces converges occ. (6 - 10°)

Buccal surface demonstrates 2 planes Rounded line angles No undercuts*

Inadequate reduction (less than 1 mm)


One plane (minimally converging) Sharp line angle No undercuts

Lack of reduction or extensive to the point of exposure



Presence of undercuts

3. PROXIMAL REDUCTION

Adequate wall convergence (6-100) Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth

by 0.5 mm* No damage to adjacent teeth No undercuts* Well-defined wings like structure (mesially:

pass proximal contact - distally: buccal to proximal contact)

Angle of convergence (>100 or <200) Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by

0.5 mm Minimal scratches on adjacent tooth No undercuts Well-defined improperly positioned wings like

structure.

Excessive convergence to point of exposure Proximal contact not opened.

Extensive damage to adjacent Presence of undercuts Ill-defined wings like structure

4. FINISH LINE

Type: Chamfer (lingual) Rounded shoulder (buccally)

Width: Chamfer (0.4-0.7 mm) Rounded shoulder (1-1.2 mm)

Smooth and continuous finish line.* Finish line position: 0.5 mm

supragingivally (for preclinical) Finish line position is appropriate for the

case (for clinical cases).


Detectable narrow finish line or slightly wide (up to 1mm lingually or 1.5 buccally)

Slight irregularity & roughness in the finish line Finish line position: Equigingival or up to 1mm

supragingivally (for preclinical) Finish line position is appropriate for the case (for

clinical cases).

Wrong design (type)

Too wide (>1.5mm) or undetectable finish line.

Significant irregularity and roughness. Finish line position: more than 1mm

supragingivally or subgingival (for preclinical) Finish line position is not appropriate for the case

(for clinical cases).


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormPosterior Metal – Ceramic Crown Preparation

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2

Occlusal Reduction

Adequate Reduction Clearance*a. Functional cusps bevel

1.5-1.7 mmb. Non-functional cusps

1.3-1.7 mm for maxillary0.8-1.2 mm for mandibular

c. Central Groove1.5 mm

Uniform and retains original contour

Buccal & LingualReduction

Adequate reduction buccally 1.5 mm, lingually 1 mm

Cervical 1/3 of buccal and lingual surfaces converges occ. (6 - 10°)

Buccal surface demonstrates 2

planes Rounded line angles No undercuts*

Proximal Reduction




- Well-defined wings like structure (mesially: pass proximal contact - distally: buccal to proximal contact)

Finish Line






Total


considered an MPE if you score ZERO in any one of them- The procedure will not be considered an MPE if you perform on of the following:

1. Unjustifiable over reduction to a point of exposure2. Damage to adjacent tooth involving the dentin


Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form # 2b

Anterior Metal – Ceramic Preparation's Evaluation Criteria


PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1. Incisal

Reduction Adequate Incisal Clearance = 2mm*

Rounded line angles. Uniform and parallel with existing incisal

edge


Sharp line angles. Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge


Not parallel with existing incisal edge

2. Facial & LingualReduction

Adequate reduction: facially (1.2-1.5 mm), lingually (1 mm)

Cervical 1/3 of facial surface converges incisally (6 - 10°)

Facial surface demonstrates 2 planes Rounded line angles Concave cingulum reduction allows 1mm

clearance No undercuts*

Inadequate reduction (less than 1 mm) or slight over-reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal).


One plane (minimally converging) Sharp line angle Inadequate clearance at the cingulum (less than

1mm) No undercuts

Lack of reduction or extensive reduction to the point of exposure



Over reduction at the cingulum.


3. Proximal Reduction


by 0.5 mm* No damage to adjacent teeth No undercuts * Wings like structure (pass proximal contact –

mesially and distally).


0.5 mm Minimal scratches on adjacent tooth No undercuts Well-defined improperly positioned wings like

structure.


Extensive damage to adjacent Presence of undercuts Ill-defined wings like structure.

4. Finish Line Type: Chamfer (lingual) Rounded shoulder (facially)


Smooth and continuous finish line (following the gingival contour)*



Type: Chamfer (lingual) Rounded shoulder (facially)

Detectable narrow finish line or slightly wide (up to 1mm lingually or 1.5mm facially)

Slight irregularity & roughness in the finish line

Finish line position: Equigingival, up to 1mm supragingivally (for preclinical)


Wrong design (type)

Too wide (>1.5mm) or undetectable finish line.

Significant irregularity and roughness.




Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormAnterior Metal – Ceramic Crown Preparation

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2

Incisal Reduction

Adequate Incisal Clearance = 2mm* Rounded line angles. Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge

Facial & Lingual Reduction





Proximal Adequate wall convergence (6-100) Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by

Reduction

0.5 mm* No damage to adjacent teeth No undercuts *

- Wings like structure (pass proximal contact – mesially and distally).

Finish Line

Type: Chamfer (lingual) Rounded shoulder (facially)





Total





Yes No


Anterior All-Ceramic Preparation's Evaluation Criteria


PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)

1. Incisal Reduction

Adequate Incisal Clearance = 1.5-2mm*


edge


Sharp line angles. Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge


Not parallel with existing incisal edge

2. Facial & Lingual Reduction





Inadequate reduction (less than 1 mm) or slight over-reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal).


One plane (minimally converging) Sharp line angle Inadequate clearance at the cingulum (less than

1mm) No undercuts

Lack of reduction or extensive reduction to the point of exposure



Over reduction at the cingulum.


3. Proximal Reducti


by 0.5 mm* No damage to adjacent teeth


0.5 mm Minimal scratches on adjacent tooth


Extensive damage to adjacent

on No undercuts* No undercuts Presence of undercuts

4. Finish Line

Type: Rounded shoulder Width: 1-1.2 mm




Type: Rounded shoulder Detectable narrow finish line or slightly wide (up

to 1.5mm) Slight irregularity & roughness in the finish line

Finish line position: Equigingival, up to 1mm supragingivally (for preclinical)


Wrong design (type) Too wide (>1.5mm) or undetectable finish





Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormAnterior All-Ceramic Crown Preparation

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2Incisal Reduction


Rounded line angles. Uniform and parallel with existing

incisal edge

Facial & LingualReduction



Facial surface demonstrates 2 planes

Rounded line angles Concave cingulum reduction

allows 1mm clearance No undercuts*

Proximal Reduction




Finish Line Type: Rounded shoulder Width: 1-1.2 mm Smooth and continuous finish line

(following the gingival contour)* Finish line position: 0.5 mm

supragingivally (for preclinical) Finish line position is appropriate

for the case (for clinical cases).

Total





Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form #

Porcelain Laminate Veneer’s Evaluation CriteriaArea of Grading C R I T E R I A

PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1.INCISAL

REDUCTION (when indicated)



edge


Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge


Sharp line angles. Not parallel with existing incisal edge

2.FACIAL REDUCTION

Adequate reduction: facially (0.3 -0.7 mm)*

Facial reduction demonstrates 3 planes Rounded line angles

Inadequate reduction (< 0.3 mm) or slight over-reduction (up to 1 mm more than ideal).

Facial reduction demonstrates 2 planes

Lack of reduction in some areas or extensive reduction (more than 1 mm).

Facial reduction demonstrates 1 plane Sharp line angles

3.PROXIMAL REDUCTION

Finish line position just facial to proximal contact (contact area was preserved)

No damage to adjacent teeth

Finish line position just facial to proximal contact (contact area was preserved)

Minimal scratches on adjacent tooth

Contact area was not preserved.

Extensive damage to adjacent

4. FINSIH LINE Type: Chamfer Width: Chamfer (0.3-0.5 mm)


Facial finish line position: 0.5 mm supragingivally (for preclinical)

Lingual finish line: 0.5 mm cervical to the reduced incisal edge (in case of wrap around design) with a minimal of 1mm distance from the centric contact (for preclinical).


Type: Chamfer Detectable narrow finish line (less than 0.3

mm). Slight irregularity & roughness in the finish

line Finish line position: Equigingival, up to 1mm

supragingivally (for preclinical)

Lingual finish line: up to 1mm cervical to the reduced incisal edge (in case of wrap around design) with a minimal of 1mm distance from the centric contact (for preclinical).


Wrong design (type) Too wide (>0.5 mm) or undetectable finish


Facial inish line position: more than 1mm supragingivally or subgingival (for preclinical)

Lingual finish line: more than 1mm cervical to the reduced incisal edge (in case of wrap around design) with less than 1mm distance from the centric contact (for preclinical).



Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormPorcelain Laminate Veneer

5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2INCISAL

REDUCTION *

(when indicated)


Rounded line angles. Uniform and parallel with existing

incisal edge

FACIAL REDUCTION *

Adequate reduction: facially (0.3 -0.7 mm)*

Facial reduction demonstrates 3 planes

Rounded line angles

PROXIMAL Finish line position just facial to proximal contact (contact area was

REDUCTION preserved) No damage to adjacent teeth

FINSIH LINE Type: Chamfer Width: Chamfer (0.3-0.5 mm) Smooth and continuous finish

line.* Facial finish line position: 0.5 mm

supragingivally (for preclinical) Lingual finish line: 0.5 mm

cervical to the reduced incisal edge (in case of wrap around design) with a minimal of 1mm distance from the centric contact (for preclinical).


Total


considered an MPE if you score ZERO in any one of them- The procedure will not be considered an MPE if you perform on of the following:- Unjustifiable over reduction to a point of exposure- Damage to adjacent tooth involving the dentin


Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form #

Resin-Bonded Fixed Partial Denture’s Evaluation Criteria(Anterior Teeth)


PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1. PALATAL

REDUCTION Even and adequate (i.e. fossa and

cingulum) 0.5 mm clearance*

Inadequate reduction, alterations are possible to obtain desired reduction

Lack of clearance Excessive cingulum tapering (Compromised

retention)

2. INCISAL EXTENSION OF PALATAL REDUCTION

1.5-2 mm short of incisal edge (to avoid metal display though the tooth)

Away from opposing occlusion

≥ 3 mm short of incisal edge (adjustable). Too close to incisal edge (undermined enamel)

Opposite to opposing occlusion

3. PROXIMAL EXTENTION

Surface adjacent to edentulous area: extending slightly facial to proximal contact (facial wraparound)

No undercuts *

Surface adjacent to edentulous area: slightly short of the proximal contact

Lack of facial wraparound Extensive extension compromising esthetics

Undercuts

4. CERVICAL FINSIH

Type: Light chamfer Type: Light chamfer Wrong design (type)

LINE Width: 0.5 mm Position: 0.5-1mm supragingival Smooth and continuous finish line* Follows gingival contour

Width: More than 0.5 up to 1 mm Too high occlusally Finish line is slightly irregular & rough in

some areas Does not follow gingival contour. but still

adjustable

Deep chamfer > 1mm Subgingival finish line

Significant irregularity and roughness Does not follow gingival contour (not

correctable)

5. PATH OF INSERTION

One path of insertion (for maximum resistance to dislodgment; prepare parallel walls)

Slight converging walls Extensive convergence (a range of insertions)

6. RETENTION AND RESISTANCE FEATURES

Vertical steps (flat notches or ledges) Short grooves:

- In the vicinity of the wraparound (proximal groove)

- In opposite side of cingulum (cingulum groove)

Slightly shallow ledges Shallow grooves (cingulum groove)

Lack of grooves Too wide, too deep, too long or diverging

grooves.


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormResin Bonded Bridges

5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2PALATAL REDUCTION

Even and adequate (i.e. fossa and cingulum)

0.5 mm clearance*

INCISAL EXTENSION OF PALATAL REDUCTION

1.5-2 mm short of incisal edge (to avoid metal display though the tooth)

Away from opposing occlusion

PROXIMAL EXTENTION

Surface adjacent to edentulous area: extending slightly facial to proximal contact (facial wraparound)

No undercuts *

CERVICAL FINSIH LINE

Type: Light chamfer Width: 0.5 mm Position: 0.5-1mm supragingival Smooth and continuous finish line Follows gingival contour.*

PATH OF INSERTION

One path of insertion (for maximum resistance to dislodgment; prepare parallel walls)

RETENTION AND RESISTANCE FEATURES

Vertical steps (flat notches or ledges)

Short grooves:- In the vicinity of the

wraparound (proximal groove)

- In opposite side of cingulum (cingulum groove)

Total

Note: Steps with (*) marks are CRITICALMINI- STEPS. This clinical procedure will not be



Yes No

Provisional Restoration's Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading C R I T E R I AProficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)

1. MARGINS All margins fit accurately. 0.5 mm open or overhang in one surface

0.5 mm open or overhang in more than one surface and/or open margin by more than 1mm.

2. PROXIMAL CONTACTS

Location: Posterior proximal contact should be at junction of occlusal and mid 1/3 Size: Should be approximately

- 2 mm occluso cervical- 2 mm buccolingual

Tightness: Floss should snap pass the contact without excessive resistance

Minimal deviation from the ideal position

Broad contact that doesn’t obliterate gingival embrasure

Proximal contact are slightly light or heavy on one or both sides

Significant deviation from the ideal position

Too broad contact that obliterate the embrasure

Open proximal contacts or excessively tight that the provisional does not seat

3. OCCLUSION Exhibit proper occlusal morphology

Proper occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation and lack of interferences during eccentric movements.

improper occlusal morphology

Proper occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation and lack of interferences during eccentric movements.

Infra or supra occlusion in maximum intercuspation or presence of any interference during eccentric movements.

4. AXIAL CONTOURS (Buccal & Lingual)

Proper axial contour with properly positioned height of contour.

Slightly over contoured or under contoured restoration.

Excessively over contoured or /under contoured restoration.

5. INTERNAL ADAPTATION &

Retentive Stable

Retentive Stable

Non-retentive Lack of stability

STABILITY (Fit) Free of defects Minimally defective fitting surface Significantly defective fitting surface

6. PONTIC DESIGN (when applicable)

Ideal pontic shape and design for the particular situation was selected.

Properly shaped embrasures.

Non-ideal pontic shape and design which does not interfere with the performance of adequate oral hygiene by the patient.

Improperly shaped embrasures but still allow proper oral hygiene by the patient.

Improper shape and/or design which interfere with the performance of adequate oral hygiene by the patient (e.g. saddle-shaped pontic)

Improperly shaped embrasures which interfere with the performance of adequate oral hygiene by the patient.

7. FINISH & POLISH Smooth, free of pits, porosity and other defects

Minimal roughness or presence of slight porosity.

Excessive roughness, porosity and/or irregularity.


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormProvisional Restoration

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2Margins All margins fit accurately.*

Proximal Contacts

Location: Posterior proximal contact should be at junction of occlusal and mid 1/3 Size: Should be approximately

- 2 mm occluso cervical- 2 mm buccolingual

Tightness: Floss should snap pass the contact without excessive resistance

Occlusion Exhibit proper occlusal morphology

Proper occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation and lack of interferences during eccentric movements.*

Axial Contours (Buccal &

Lingual)

Proper axial contour with properly positioned height of contour.

Internal Adaptation & Stability (Fit)

Retentive Stable

Free of defects

Pontic Design (for fixed dental

prosthesis)

Ideal pontic shape and design for the particular situation was selected.

Properly shaped embrasures.Finish and Polish

Smooth, free of pits, porosity and other defects

Total

Note: Steps with (*) marks are CRITICAL MINI- STEPS. This clinical procedure will not be



Yes No


Final Impression Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading

C R I T E R I A

Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1.EXACT

RECORD Record of fine details of

prepared tooth/teeth.* Record of unprepared teeth

structures immediately apical to the margins

Record of fine details of prepared teeth

Lack to include clearly unprepared tooth structure in one surface apical to margins

Failure to record details of prepared teeth

Lack to include clearly unprepared tooth structure in more than one surface apical to margins

2.NO VOIDS

Free of voids Free of tears and any

imperfections No tray show

Free of any marginal voids. Free of tears and any

imperfections Slight tray show in some

areas away from the prepared tooth/teeth and away from the occlusal surface of the unprepared teeth.

Presence of any marginal void.

Presence of any tear and/or imperfection.

Tray show in relation to the occlusal surface of the prepared tooth/teeth and/or the occlusal surface of the unprepared teeth.

3.IMPRESION

Impression material adherent to and supported

________ Lack of impression/tray adherence

MATERIAL SUPPORT & ADHERENCE TO THE TRAY

by the tray. Impression material is not supported by the tray.


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormFinal Impression

5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2Exact Record Record of fine details of

prepared teeth* Record unprepared teeth

structures immediately apical to the margins

No Voids Free of voids Free of tears and any

imperfections

Impression Material I Support &

Impression material should be supported by tray*

Adherence to the tray

Total




Yes No


Metal Try-in Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading


1. Proximal Contacts

Proximal contacts were checked (if in metal) with dental floss*

Any discrepancy (open or tight contact) was detected and adjusted, if possible.

________ Proximal contacts were not checked (if in metal).

Any discrepancy (open or tight contact) was not detected and/or adjusted (if possible).

2. Metal Framework Seating

Metal structure seating was checked on the cast and intraorally.

Rocking, if any, was detected and adjusted (if possible).*

________ Restoration seating was not checked on the cast and/or intraorally.

Rocking, if any, was not detected and/or not adjusted (if possible).

3. Marginal Adaptation

Marginal adaptation was checked on the cast and intraorally.

Marginal discrepancy, if any, was identified and adjusted (if possible).*

________ Marginal adaptation was not checked on the cast and intraorally.

Marginal discrepancy, if any, was not identified and/or not adjusted (if possible).

4. Occlusion If in metal: Occlusion was checked for proper stable

________ If in metal: Occlusal interferences and/or lack of

tripod occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation and no occlusal interferences in all excursions.*

Necessary adjustment was performed, if indicated.

If occlusal porcelain: adequate clearance and proper metal/porcelain junction were checked.

stable intercuspation were not detected.

Necessary adjustment, was not performed, if indicated.

If occlusal porcelain: adequate clearance and proper metal/porcelain junction were not checked.

5. Contour Embrasures and contours

were evaluated for the proper size of the embrasures and connectors.

________ Embrasures and contours were not evaluated for the proper size of the embrasures and connectors..


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormMetal Try-In

5th yr

6th yr

Student Name Patient’s File No.



Ethical conduct and professionalism Yes No


Infection controlYes No


Communication skillsYes No


KnowledgeYes No

Student knows the principles of the procedure and material selection and answers instructor’s questions correctly with justification



Student self-

evaluation

Instructor evaluatio

n Feedback

0 1 2 0 1 2

Proximal Contacts

Proximal contacts were checked (if in metal) with dental floss*

Any discrepancy (open or tight contact) was detected and adjusted, if possible.

Cast Seating

Metal structure seating was checked on the cast and intraorally.

Rocking, if any, was detected and adjusted (if possible). *

Marginal Adaptation


Marginal discrepancy, if any, was identified and adjusted (if possible).*

Occlusion If in metal: Occlusion was

checked for proper stable tripod occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation and no occlusal interferences in all excursions. *

Necessary adjustment was performed, if indicated.

If occlusal porcelain: adequate clearance and proper metal/porcelain junction were checked.

Contour Embrasures and contours

were evaluated for the proper size of the embrasures and connectors.

TotalNote:

Steps with (*) marks are CRITICAL MINI-STEPS. This clinical procedure will not be considered an MPE if you score ZERO in any one of them


Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division

Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form #13Porcelain Try-in Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading


1. Proximal Contacts

Proximal contacts were checked with dental floss and any discrepancy (open or tight contact) was detected and adjusted, if possible.

________ Proximal contacts were not

checked and any discrepancy (open or tight contact) was not detected.

2.Restoration Seating

Restoration seating was checked on the cast and intraorally.

Any rocking, if any, was detected and adjusted, if possible.

________

Restoration seating was not checked on the cast and/or Intraorally.

Rocking, if any, was not detected and/or adjusted.

3.Marginal Adaptation


Any marginal discrepancy was identified and adjusted (if possible).

________

Marginal adaptation was not checked on the cast and intraorally.

Any marginal discrepancy, if any, was not identified and/or not adjusted (if possible).

4.Occlusion Occlusion was checked for

proper stable tripod occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation

No interferences in protrusive

________ Occlusion was not checked. Lack of stable tripod occlusal

contacts in maximum intercuspation, which was not

and lateral excursions.dentected.

Interferences in protrusive or lateral excursions.

5.Contour Contour was checked and

evaluated. Necessary adjustments, if any,

were performed.________

Contour was not checked. Necessary adjustments, if any,

were not performed.

6.Esthetics and Phonetics

Esthetics and phonetics were checked.

Patient approval was obtained. ________ Esthetics and phonetics were

not checked. Patient approval was not

obtained.


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormPorcelain Try-In

5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation

Instructor evaluatio

n Feedback

0 1 2 0 1 2

Proximal Contacts*

Proximal contacts were checked with dental floss and any discrepancy (open or tight contact) was detected and adjusted, if possible.

Restoration Seating*

Restoration seating was checked on the cast and intraorally. Any rocking if any, was

detected and adjusted, if possible.

Marginal Adaptation*

Marginal adaptation was checked on the case and intraorally.

Any marginal discrepancy was identified and adjusted (if possible).

Occlusion*

Occlusion was checked for proper stable tripod occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation

No interferences in protrusive and lateral excursions.

Contour Contour was checked and

evaluated. Necessary adjustments, if

any, were performed.

Esthetics and Phonetics*

Esthetics and phonetics were checked.

Patient approval was obtained.

Total

Note: Steps with (*) marks are CRITICAL MINI-STEPS. This clinical procedure will not be

considered an MPE if you score ZERO in any one of them Student is allowed for only one porcelain try-in per case.


Yes No


Trial Cementation Evaluation Criteria

Area of GradingC R I T E R I A

Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1. Cement

selection Proper selection of the

provisional cement________ Improperly selected

provisional cement.

2. Restoration Seating

Completely seated restoration with no occlusal alteration

________ Improperly seated restoration causing occlusal interferences and marginal discrepancy

3. Excess Cement Removal

No cement remnants around restoration(s) and pontic tissue surface

Slight cement remnants around restoration and under pontic

Messy cement remnants around restoration and under pontic

4. Oral Hygiene

Demonstrates oral hygiene instructions (including, the use of

________ Failure to demonstrate oral hygiene instructions

Instructions

floss threader and proxy brush when indicated).


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormTrial Cementation

5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2Cement selection

Proper selection of the provisional cement


Completely seated restoration with no occlusal alteration

Excess Cement Removal*


Oral Hygiene Demonstrates oral hygiene

Instructions*

instructions (including, the use of floss threader and proxy brush when indicated).

Total




Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form #14

Final Cementation Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading


Cement Selection

Proper cement selection and manipulation ________ Improper cement selection

or manipulation

Restoration Seating

Restoration completely seated

No alteration of occlusion ________ Improperly seated

restoration with occlusal interferences and marginal discrepancy

Excess Cement Removal


________ Messy cement remnants

around restoration and under pontic

Oral Hygiene Instructions

Demonstrates oral hygiene instructions (including, the use of floss threader and proxy brush when indicated).

________

Failure to demonstrate oral hygiene instructions


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormFinal Cementation

5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2Cement

Selection* Proper cement selection

and manipulation


Restoration completely seated

No alteration of occlusion

Excess Cement Removal*


Oral Hygiene Instructions*

Demonstrates oral hygiene instructions (including, the

use of floss threader and proxy brush when indicated).

Total




Yes No

Cast Post and Core

PROCEDURE C R I T E R I A

Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)

1. Preparation of coronal tooth structure

Adequate coronal tooth reduction. All unsupported tooth structure was removed. Part of remaining coronal tissue is prepared

perpendicular to the post (+ve stop against wedging).

Part of remaining coronal tissue is prepared parallel to the post (+ve stop against rotation)(Anti-rotation groove if insufficient tooth structure remains)

No internal or external undercuts No sharp angles Smooth finish line

____________ Inadequate reduction of coronal tooth structure.

Unsupported tooth structure not removed Absence of +ve stop against wedging. Absence of anti-rotation groove if

insufficient tooth structure remains Internal or external undercuts that will

prevent withdrawal of the pattern

2. Removal of Root Canal Filling Material

At least 3-5 mm good apical seal of gutta percha left.

____________ < 3mm of Gutta percha left.

3. Post Space Preparation

Minimal canal enlargement to receive appropriate post

Gradual taper No undercuts or ledges that was created by the

students during the post space preparation.

Canal width enlargement exceeding 1/3 diameter at cervical area (1mm left circumferentially of sound tooth structure)

No undercuts or ledges that was created by the students during the post space preparation.

Canal width enlargement exceeding ½ diameter at cervical area (less than 1mm left circumferentially of sound tooth structure)

Over tapered canal Presence of ledges or undercuts that was

created by the students during the post space preparation.

4. Ferrule Effect

1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure obtained when possible.

Adequate ferrule thickness (at least 1mm)

____________ Ferrule not obtained when possible.

Inadequate ferrule thickness (<1mm)

5. Pattern Build-Up

Post fabrication Dowel pattern extended to the full depth of

prepared canal Dowel pattern inserted and removed easily

without bending, with tug back Conforms to shape of canal space with no

defects or porositiesCore fabrication Properly shaped to receive final restoration Conform to the shape of the optimal tooth

preparation. Accurate fit of core/tooth interface

Post fabrication Dowel pattern is short by 1-2 mm to full length

Passive fit, without tug back

Minimal porosities or defects (correctable)

Core fabrication Slightly over-contoured core build-up.

Post fabrication Tight or loose pattern Short post length (> 2 mm)

Core fabrication Significantly over-contoured or under-

contoured contoured core build-up. Marked discrepancy at the tooth /core

junction

6. Post & Core Try-In

-Student evaluated the cast post and core and identified deficiencies:Post Fits accurately to full length Passively fit without interfering No casting defectsCore Properly shaped for minimal adjustments to

receive final restoration Accurate fit of core/tooth interface

-Student performed the necessary adjustment/s, when needed and possible.

____________ -Student did not evaluate the cast post and core and/or failed to identify deficiencies:

-Student did not performe the necessary adjustment/s, when needed and possible.

7. Cementat Proper type of cement was selected. Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface or Improper selection of cement.

ion

Accurately seated. Luting agent fill all dead space within the root

canal system. No voids. Excess cement was removed.

core/sound tooth structure interface by 0.5mm or less.

Slight voids were observed in the post-insertion radiograph.

Cement residues exists

Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface or core/sound tooth structure interface (by more than 0.5mm)


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormCast Post and Core

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2Preparation of coronal tooth

structure

Facial structure of the tooth is adequately reduced for good esthetics

Part of remaining coronal tissue is prepared perpendicular to the post (+ve stop against wedging)

Part of remaining coronal tissue is prepared parallel to the post (+ve stop against rotation)

(Anti-rotation groove if insufficient tooth structure remains)

No internal or external undercuts* All unsupported tooth structure is

removed No sharp angles

Smooth finish line

Removal of Root Canal Filling

Material

3-5 mm good apical seal of gutta percha*

Post Space Preparation

Minimal canal enlargement to receive appropriate post

Gradual taper No undercuts or ledges that was

created by the students during the post space preparation.*

Ferrule Effect

1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure obtained when possible.*

Adequate ferrule thickness (at least 1mm) *

Pattern Build-Up

Post fabrication Dowel pattern extended to the full

depth of prepared canal* Dowel pattern inserted and removed

easily without bending Conforms to shape of canal space with

no defects or porositiesCore fabrication Properly shaped to receive final

restoration Conform to the shape of the optimal

tooth preparation. Accurate fit of core/tooth interface*

Post & Core Try-In

-Student evaluated the cast post and core and identified deficiencies:Post Fits accurately to full length Passively fit without interfering* No casting defectsCore Properly shaped for minimal adjustments

to receive final restoration Accurate fit of core/tooth interface*-Student performed the necessary adjustment/s, when needed and possible.

Cementation

Proper type of cement was selected. Accurately seated.* Luting agent fill all dead space within

the root canal system. No voids. Excess cement was removed.

Total




Yes No

Prefabricated Post and Core

PROCEDURE C R I T E R I A

Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)1. Preparati

on of coronal tooth structure

Adequate coronal tooth reduction. All unsupported tooth structure was removed. No external undercuts No sharp angles Smooth finish line

____________ Inadequate reduction of coronal tooth structure.

Unsupported tooth structure not removed External undercut.

2. Removal of Root Canal Filling Material

At least 3-5 mm good apical seal of gutta percha left.

____________ Less than 3mm of Gutta percha left.

3. Post Space Preparation

Minimal canal enlargement to receive appropriate post size.

Gradual taper No undercuts or ledges that was created by the

students during the post space preparation.

Canal width enlargement exceeding 1/3 diameter at cervical area (1mm left circumferentially of sound tooth structure).

No undercuts or ledges that was created by the students during the post space preparation.

Canal width enlargement exceeding ½ diameter at cervical area (less than 1mm left circumferentially of sound tooth structure),

Over tapered canal. Presence of ledges or undercuts that was

created by the students during the post space preparation.

4. Ferrule Effect

1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure obtained when possible.

Adequate ferrule thickness (at least 1mm)

____________ Ferrule not obtained when possible.

Inadequate ferrule thickness (<1mm)

5. Cementation

Proper type of cement was selected. No gap at post/gutta percha interface. Luting agent fill all dead space within the root

canal system. No voids in the post-insertion radiograph.

Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface by 0.5mm or less.

1-3 small voids were observed in the post-insertion radiograph.

Improper selection of the cement. Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface

by more than 0.5mm. >3 small voids or large voids in the post-

insertion radiograph.

6. Core Build-Up

Proper selection of the core material Core properly shaped to receive final restoration

conform to the shape of the optimal tooth preparation.

No voids within the core. Accurate adaptation at the core/tooth interface.

1-3 small voids were observed in the post-insertion radiograph.

Improper selection of the core material. Core improperly shaped and does not

provide adequate retention and resistance forms.

>3 small voids or large voids in the post-insertion radiograph.

Gap at the core/tooth interface.


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation FormPrefabricated Post and Core

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2

Preparation of coronal tooth

structure

Adequate coronal tooth reduction. All unsupported tooth structure was

removed. No external undercuts * No sharp angles Smooth finish line

Removal of Root Canal Filling

Material

At least 3-5 mm good apical seal of gutta percha left.*

Post Space Preparation

Minimal canal enlargement to receive appropriate post size.

Gradual taper No undercuts or ledges that was

created by the students during the

post space preparation.*

Ferrule Effect

1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure obtained when possible.*

Adequate ferrule thickness (at least 1mm). *

Cementation

Proper type of cement was selected. No gap at post/gutta percha interface. Luting agent fill all dead space within

the root canal system.No voids in the post-insertion radiograph.

Core Build-Up

Proper selection of the core material Core properly shaped to receive final

restoration conform to the shape of the optimal tooth preparation.

No voids within the core. Accurate adaptation at the

core/tooth interface.*

Total




Yes No

Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form # 8R

Wax Pattern Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading


1. Occlusal Contour

Well-defined anatomy, with correct cusp height & position.

Well-defined anatomy, with incorrect cusp height and/or position.

Ill-defined occlusal surface anatomy

2. Facial & lingual contour and profile

Well-defined facial and lingual contour and profile.

Correct height of contour position & form.

Slightly ill-defined facial and lingual contour and profile.


Did not follow facial or lingual contour and profile (too square or too round).

Incorrect height of contour position & form.

3. Surface texture

Smooth and polished surface (no scratches).

Roughness in relation to at least one surface.

Significant irregularity or nodular surface

4. Interproximal contour and contacts

Positive proximal contacts (with correct position and size)

Correct proximal contour and form.

Positive proximal contacts. Incorrect proximal contour and/or

form.

Open proximal contact.

5. Margin finish

Smooth and continuous marginal finish.

Correct margin position

Roughness and/or irregularities in relation to the margin of the wax pattern.

Correct margin position.

Open or overextended margin. Negative or positive margin (in

relation to the horizontal axis)

6. Occlusion Tripod contact for each centric (functional) cusp in maximum

Slightly high contact in maximum intercuspation.

No contact or significantly high contact during in maximum

intercuspation. No occlusal interference of

posterior teeth on working side, non-working side or protrusive movements.

No occlusal interference of posterior teeth on working side, non-working side or protrusive movements.

intercuspation Any kind of interferences

between maxillary & mandibular posterior teeth on working side, non-working side or protrusive movements.

7. Pontic and connector design (only for FPD)

Appropriate pontic design. Appropriate connector design

and size.

____________ Inappropriate pontic design. Inappropriate connector design

and size.


Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Wax Pattern

4th yr 5th yr

6th yr

Student Name





Yes No









Student self-

evaluation


0 1 2 0 1 2 Occlusal Contour

Well-defined anatomy, with correct cusp height & position.

Facial & lingual contour and

profile

Well-defined facial and lingual contour and profile.


Surface texture Smooth and polished surface (no scratches).

Interproximal contour and

Positive proximal contacts (with correct position and size)*

contacts Correct proximal contour and form.

Margin finish Smooth and continuous

marginal finish. Correct margin position*

Occlusion

Tripod contact for each centric (functional) cusp in maximum intercuspation.*

No occlusal interference of posterior teeth on working side, non-working side or protrusive movements.

Pontic and connector

design (only for FPD)

Appropriate pontic design Appropriate connector

design and size

Total




Yes No

Documents

and CE… · Web viewIf in metal: Occlusion was checked for proper stable tripod occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation and no occlusal interferences in all excursions. * Necessary