e-mail Print Share

Letters: Puzzled by opinion

July 11, 2016 After reading the June 6 ADA News My View “Keeping Pace With Technology,” by Dr. Stanley Markman, I have to admit that I was confused by his conclusions regarding new technology.

A result of his editorial is that it may dissuade dentists from looking into scanning and cone beam technologies. I have found that utilizing intraoral scanning has many advantages over taking dental impressions. Scanning is just as quick, if not quicker, than taking an impression. Most intraoral scanners will pay for themselves quickly in savings from impression and bite registration materials. Lab turnaround time is much faster when you upload a scan to the lab website. Accuracy is better when using an intraoral scan. It often takes less chair time to seat a crown made from a scan due to the improved accuracy of the finished crown. Lastly, the ability to do same-day dentistry is a huge benefit for today’s typical patient who has a busy schedule of their own to keep.

I was further puzzled by Dr. Markman’s perception of cone beam radiology as not solving a problem, when I have found that it clearly improves safety, efficiency and overall quality of treatment. For example, I can do a virtual surgery weeks in advance of a patient’s appointment.
By doing this, I can predict how long the surgical appointment will take, if I have to lay a flap, do bone grafting and if there is any important structures that need special care to be avoided.

I do agree with Dr. Markman in that it is imperative to look into warranties, service and upgrades before a dentist invests in new technology. These features vary significantly between brands and some are reasonable and others are not. My experience with both intraoral scanning and cone beam radiology has been the opposite of Dr. Markman’s.

I would encourage my fellow dentists to take a serious look at bringing one, or both of these newer technologies into their office.

Kaveh Ghaboussi, D.M.D.
Madison, Wisconsin