Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Case Series
Full Version
Attachment Retained Tooth Supported Overdentures: A Case Series
Correspondence Address :
Shruti Potdukhe,
Kamothe, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
E-mail: shrutipotdukhe@gmail.com
Present case series describes the three different types of attachments use for tooth supported overdenture for prosthetic rehabilitation. Loss of teeth causes continuous resorption of the bone leading to a compromised treatment. Retaining two or more natural teeth can be used as an abutment for prosthetic rehabilitation of partial edentulism arches. Preventive prosthodontics includes tooth supported overdentures which preserves natural teeth, roots and maintains propioception. Depending upon the interarch distance available various types of attachments can be used to enhance the retentive factors. The first case (71-year-old female patient) describes the use of telescopic attachment overdenture on 33, 43 with available interarch space of 15 mm in mandibular arch. The second case (62-year-old female patient) describes the use of ball attachments overdenture on 34 and 35 with available interarch space of 13 mm in mandibular arch. The third case (60-year-old female patient) is about equator attachment overdenture on 33, 43 with available interarch space of 12 mm in mandibular arch. Use of telescopic, ball and equator attachments for tooth supported overdentures has enhanced the retention, stability, function and aesthetic outcome of the removable prosthesis in mandibular arch. The natural teeth provide additional support, stability and retention of the overdenture than the edentulous ridges alone which is particularly advantageous for mandibular arch.
Ball Attachment, Equator attachment, Prosthetic rehabilitation, Telescopic
Preventive Prosthodontics refers to treatment that prevents the factors adversely affecting the orodento facial tissues and structures such as periodontium, alveolar bone, basal bone and surrounding structures (1). Preventive prosthodontics include overdentures which are removable partial or complete denture that covers and rests on one or more remaining natural teeth, roots, and/or dental implants (2).
Overdentures are of two types- tooth supported and implant supported. Implant supported prostheses are widely used but some anatomical, financial and medical constraints prevent patients from opting for this treatment. Tooth supported overdenture is more preventive and cost effective as it preserves the periodontium which acts as shock absorber, retains elastic modulus of teeth near to bone and maintains bone preservation (3).
Depending upon the interarch space available to enhance the retention of removable prosthesis, different types of attachments which are the mechanical device used for the fixation, retention and stabilisation of dental prosthesis can be used (4). In this article, three cases of partially edentulous mandibular ridge rehabilitated by tooth supported overdenture using telescopic, ball and equator types of attachments have been discussed.
Case 1
A 71-year-old female patient reported to the Department of Prosthodontics with the chief complaint of difficulty in mastication due to missing teeth in upper and lower arch and unaesthetic appearance since four years and wants replacement for the same. On extraoral examination, facial form was ovoid, concave with sunken cheeks. The length of the lips was average (Table/Fig 1). Intraoral examination showed presence of 11,12,13,21,22,33,34,43; Recession with 11,12,13,21,22,33,34,43; root caries with 12,13,22; grade III mobility with 11,21. Depending upon the condition of the remaining natural teeth, the maxillary teeth were extracted and planned for conventional acrylic complete denture (Table/Fig 2)(a),(b). Adequate interarch space of 15 mm was present. Radiographic examination showed prefabricated metal post with 33, 34, 43 (Table/Fig 3). As the abutment teeth in lower arch were cemented with prefabricated post and had adequate interarch space of 15 mm, so went ahead with the telescopic attachment overdenture.
A primary impression for maxillary arch was made with impression compound (Y-Dent) in a metal stock tray and for mandibular arch was made in irreversible hydrocolloid. The abutment teeth were prepared with diamond rotary bur producing chamfer margins keeping 4 mm of height and 6 degree tapering (Table/Fig 4)a.
Impression for fabrication of primary coping was made with addition silicone (Flexceed). On poured cast wax patterns were fabricated for primary coping producing chamfer margin of 0.5 mm all around for secondary copings which was then checked on surveyor for parallelism. The primary copings were cemented using glass ionomer cement (Table/Fig 4)b.
Secondary copings with 0.5 mm chamfer margin were fabricated on primary coping and were sandblasted (Table/Fig 5)a. The sectional border moulding was done for maxillary arch with low fusing impression compound (DPI-Pinnacle). The lower arch impression was made using medium fusing elastomeric impression material (Reprosil dentsply Sirona) and pick up of secondary coping was done (Table/Fig 5)b.
Facebow record was made to orient maxillary cast on the articulator (Hanau). Vertical and Centric Jaw relation was done. Trial Dentures were evaluated to verify the previous steps and then dentures were processed. Secondary copings were picked up in denture using autoplymerising acrylic resin and were polished (Table/Fig 6)a.
Dentures were inserted and evaluated (Table/Fig 6)b. The patient was recalled after 24 hours, once in a week and monthly. Patient was happy and satisfied (Table/Fig 7).
Case 2
A 62-year-old female patient reported to Department of Prosthodontics with the chief complaint of poor aesthetics due to missing teeth and difficulty in mastication since two years. Extra oral examination showed ovoid facial form, straight facial profile (Table/Fig 8). Intra oral examination shows presence of 11,21,22,23,25 present in upper arch (Table/Fig 9)(a) and 34,44 present in the lower arch (Table/Fig 9)(b). The maxillomandibular relation showed adequate interarch distance of 13 mm in the region of 34 and 35. The type of attachment decided were ball attachment followed by mandibular overdenture and maxillary complete denture. The crown root ratio was altered and post space preparation was done. The post space impression was made using pattern resin and was picked up in elastomeric impression (Table/Fig 10)a,b. Parallelism of ball attachment (1 mm) on wax pattern was done using surveyor (Table/Fig 11)a. The copings were cemented using glass ionomer cement (Table/Fig 11)b. Other steps for conventional denture were followed. Denture insertion was done (Table/Fig 12)a,b. The patient was recalled after 24 hours, once in a week and monthly. Patient was happy and satisfied.
Case 3
A 60-year-old female patient reported with chief complaint of multiple missing teeth, inability to chew and unaesthetic look since 3 years. Extra oral examination revealed ovoid facial form, convex profile (Table/Fig 13)a. Intra oral examination revealed presence of 33, 43 (Table/Fig 13)b. The interarch space was 12 mm. Depending upon the existing condition of the abutment and interarch space available mandibular overdenture with equator attachment was planned. All steps were similar to ball attachment except use of equator attachment which is the smallest dimensional dental attachment with vertical height of 2.1 mm (Table/Fig 14)a,b. Denture insertion was done (Table/Fig 15). The patient was recalled after 24 hours, once in a week and monthly. Patient was happy and satisfied.
Due to various advantages such as preservation of alveolar bone, maintenance of proprioception, improved retention, stability and support, enhanced psychological comfort and increased masticatory efficiency. Tooth-supported overdentures are preferred preventive treatment option over conventional complete dentures and implant supported overdentures (5). To enhance the retention and prognosis of overdentures, various attachments are used.
Telescopic overdentures use telescopic crowns as attachments on few remaining natural teeth (6). It works on the principle of frictional fit. According to studies done, it states that for better results, the abutment tooth should be periodontally sound, evenly distributed in arch for better stress distribution, and with interocclusal space of atleast ≥13 mm for copings, denture base, teeth and freeway space. The height and taper of primary coping should be atleast 4 mm and taper of 6 degrees determine path of insertion and amount of retention (7).
Arnold C et al., compared the retentive forces of different types of crown attachments and found that telescopic crowns had the highest retention forces (8). So in first case depending upon existing condition of abutment teeth and interarch space telescopic attachments were used for overdenture in mandibular arch. In case two ball attachments were used for mandibular overdenture as the arch was ovoid, abutment teeth were non vital, evenly distributed and periodontally sound, interarch space present was 13 mm. According to a study by Scherer MD et al., it states that retentive forces of ball attachment are more compared to other attachment system. Ball attachment shows increased retention, anteroposterior and vertical movement of the denture (9).
In case 3, OT equator attachments for mandibular tooth supported overdenture was used. Equator attachment is used in cases where interarch space is reduced and retentive properties are maintained without compromising the prosthetic outcome (10). For all three patients, follow-up appointments were planned after 24 hours, once a week and once in a month. All the patients reported with good satisfaction, improved appearance and function after using the prosthesis with no discomfort.
This series presented three cases, where the treatment plan was primarily decided by the amount of interarch distance present. It can be observed that pleasing aesthetics was achieved in all the cases. Retained healthy teeth with compromised periodontal status can be used as the abutment and bio-mechanical, aesthetical advantages can be achieved by preventive prosthodontics.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/52599.16235
Date of Submission: Oct 02, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Dec 21, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Feb 01, 2022
Date of Publishing: Apr 01, 2022
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Oct 04, 2022
• Manual Googling: Jan 29, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Feb 12, 2022 (7%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com