Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department Fixed Prosthodontics

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).

Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics

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

Numbers Due MPE MPE forms required week 1. Full metal veneer crown preparation: Mandibular 1st or 2nd molar. Maxillary 1st or 2nd molar. 2 Full metal crown preparation 2 2. Metal-ceramic posterior crown preparation: Mandibular premolar. Maxillary premolar. 1 Posterior Metal-ceramic preparation Mandibular 1st molar. 2 Thro Maxillary 1st molar. 1 ugho 2 3. Metal-ceramic anterior crown preparation: ut Maxillary central incisor the Anterior Metal-ceramic preparation 1 year

4. Anterior all-ceramic crown preparation: Maxillary central incisor Anterior All-ceramic preparation 2 5. Custom tray on study model 1 Custom Tray 6. Provisional restoration 1 Provisional Restorations 7. Resin pattern post and core 1 Custom Post and Core 8. Wax pattern 1 Wax pattern Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics

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 13 -14 (1st and 2nd semesters) preparation 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 Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics

OMR 534-Clinical fixed prosthodontics MPEs (5th year): Numbers MPE Due week MPE forms required 1. Examination, Diagnosis and 3 Under development Treatment planning Custom Post and 2. Custom Post and Core + Crown* 1 Core 3. Pre-fabricated Post and Core + Through Pre-fabricated Post 1 Crown* out the and Core year 4. 3-unit Fixed Dental Prosthesis (FDP)* 1 See below 5. Provisional restoration for 3-unit FDP Provisional 1 (on simulator) Restorations 6. 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 Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics

OMR 534-Clinical fixed prosthodontics CEs (5th year): Numbers Due week required CE* 1. Provisional restoration for 3-unit FDP (on simulator) 1 13 -14 (1st semesters)

2. Examination, Diagnosis and treatment 1 8-9 (2nd semesters) planning for a case 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 Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics

CCC 600 - Comprehensive Care Clinic (6th year)

Students are required to collect 30 points from the following MPEs

MPE Points 1. Crown 5 2. Laminate veneer 4 3. Cast post and core* 4 4. Prefabricated post and core* 3 5. Resin-bonded FDP 5 6. 3-unit FDP** 10 * Must be covered by crown. ** Mandatory

Numbers CE* required Due week

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

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

3. Delivery of the final restoration and 1-2* 13 -14 (1st semesters) follow-up * Depending on the clinical scenario, if both preparations could be taken by one or two separate impressions. Casts Mounting’s Evaluation Criteria C R I T E R I A Area of Grading Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)  Recording all the soft and hard tissue  Some of the details are missing in non-  Some of the details are missing in accurately. significant areas significant areas Accuracy  Few voids and/or air bubbles  Significant amount of voids and/or air  Casts free of voids or air bubbles bubbles  Base should be of adequate height ______ Base is very thin or very thick.  Base is not trimmed properly Base  Base trimmed properly

 Condylar inclination= 30°  One or both condylar setting were not set  Incisal pin is not on zero when it is properly. touching the incisal table*.  Bennett angle =15°,  Incisal pin is on zero when it is touching  The condylar element is not in the most the incisal table*. posterior position*. Articulator Setting  Incisal pin is on zero when it is touching the incisal table*.  The condylar element should be in the  The condylar element should be in the most posterior position*. most posterior position*.

 Face bow attached to the articulator ______ Face bow is not attached to the properly* articulator properly*

 Maxillary cast correctly seated on  Maxillary cast is not correctly seated on Maxillary Cast bitefork registration* bitefork registration* Mounting  Mounting plaster should engage undercuts  Mounting plaster is not engaging undercuts in the base of the cast and the mounting in the base of the cast and the mounting plate plate  Teeth are fully seated in interocclusal ______ Teeth are not fully seated in record*. interocclusal record*, and/or Mandibular Casts Mounting  Mandibular casts is mounted in the  Mandibular casts is not mounted in the proper centric position*. proper centric position*.  Articulator is clean without remnants of  Articulator is clean with remnants of plaster  Articulator is not clean with significant plaster attached to the articulator attached to the articulator members. amount of remnants of plaster attached to Neatness members. the articulator members.  Mounting plaster is neat and smooth.  Mounting plaster is slightly rough.  Mounting plaster is significantly rough Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Casts Mounting

4th yr 5th yr 6th yr

Student Name Patient’s File No. Computer No. Pre-op approval Serial No. Tooth No.

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

Surfaces are clean, no visible littering, disinfected, properly Infection control Yes No wrapped Communication Student communicates efficiently with patient and instructor using skills Yes No clear words and logical sequence Student knows the principles of the procedure and material Knowledge Yes No selection and answers instructor’s questions correctly with justification

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  Recording all the soft and hard tissue accurately. Accuracy  Casts free of voids or air bubbles

 Base should be of adequate height Base  Base trimmed properly

 Condylar Inclination= 300

 Lateral =150,

Articulator Setting  Incisal= 00

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

Maxillary Cast  Face Bow Attached to Mounting Articulator Properly*

 Maxillary cast correctly seated on bitefork registration*  Mounting plaster should engage undercuts in the base of the cast and the mounting plate

 Teeth are fully seated in interocclusal record Mandibular Casts Mounting  Mandibular Casts Mounted in Maximum Intercuspation Position*

 Incisal Guide Pin in Contact with Anterior Table and flush with Incisal Guide Pin articulator’s upper compartment

Neatness

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 Criteria C R I T E R I A Area of Grading Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. Spacing  Even space along the tray that permits an  Uneven space in some areas along the tray  No space even impression thickness of 2-3 mm  Improper thickness (less than 2 mm) 2. Stoppers  3 stoppers:  Only 2 stoppers with proper size and  Less than 2 stoppers - Tripodal arrangement location or 3 stoppers but with improper  Lack of stability. and Stability - On non-centric cusps of teeth not to size, distribution or location. be prepared  Stable on the cast - 2x2 mm dimensions  Stable on the cast

3. Peripheral  Extended about 5 mm cervical to the  Peripheries minimally over/under extended  Peripheries under or over extended (more gingival margins of the teeth. along few areas of the margins of the teeth than 7 mm or less than 3mm from the Extension  Shaped properly to allow for frenum (+/- 2mm) gingival margins of the teeth) attachments  Shaped properly for frenum attachments  Unrelieved at frenum attachments 4. Smoothness  Smooth with no sharp edges along all the  Slightly rough with few localized areas of  Rough and irregular surfaces with multiple tray margin sharp edges. areas of sharp edges & Thickness  Have consistent thickness of 2-3 mm  Uneven thickness along parts of the tray.  Uneven thickness and perforation in some places. 5. Handle  Handle is at right angle on the occlusal  Handle is not at right angle with the  No handle. plane and doesn’t interfere with the lip. occlusal plane but doesn’t interfere with the  Handle interferes with the lip.  Even thickness along the handle and at the lip.  Very thick or very thin handle. connection with the tray  Uneven thickness along handle and bulky connection with the tray. Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Custom Tray

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2 Spacing  Even space along the tray that permits an even impression thickness of 2-3 mm

Stoppers and  Three stoppers*: Stability - 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 Extension the gingival margins  Shaped properly to allow for frenum attachments

Smoothness  Smooth with no sharp edges along & Thickness 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

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

Yes No Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form # 1 All Metal Preparation's Evaluation Criteria Area of Grading C R I T E R I A PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. OCCLUSAL  Adequate Reduction Clearance*  Inadequate reduction, alterations are possible  Inadequate reduction (tooth still in contact REDUCTION to obtain desired reduction, or slight over- or no clearance) or over reduced to point of a) Functional cusps bevel reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal) exposure 1.5 mm b) Non-functional cusps

1.0 mm  Flat surface, or not following original c) Central Groove  Follow contour but not uniform contour 1.0 mm  Uniform and retains original contour

2. AXIAL  Adequate reduction buccally and lingual 1 mm  Under-reduction (< 1 mm)  Lack of reduction or extensive to the point SURFACE of exposure REDUCTION  (Baccul &  Converging more than 20° Angle of convergence (>10° or <20°) Lingual)  Cervical 1/3 of facial and lingual surface  converges occ. (6-10°)

 Buccal surface demonstrates 2 planes  One plane (severely converging)  One plane (minimally converging)  Rounded line angles  Sharp line angle  No undercuts*  Presence of undercuts.  No undercuts

3. PROXIMAL  Adequate wall convergence (6-100)  Angle of convergence (>100 or <200)  Excessive convergence to point of exposure REDUCTION or converging more than 20°

 Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by  Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth  Proximal contact not opened. 0.5 mm* by 0.5 mm

 No damage to adjacent teeth  Minimal scratches on adjacent tooth  Extensive damage to adjacent teeth  No undercuts*  No undercuts  Presence of undercuts.

4. FINSIH LINE  Type: Chamfer (buccal & lingual)  Type: Chamfer (buccal & lingual)  Wrong design (type)

 Width: Chamfer (0.4-0.7 mm)  Detectable narrow finish line or slightly wide  Too wide (>1mm) or undetectable finish (up to 1mm) line.

 Smooth and continuous finish line.*  Slight irregularity & roughness in the finish  Significant irregularity and roughness. line

 Finish line position: Equigingival, up to 1mm  Finish line position: 0.5 mm supragingivally (for supragingivally (for preclinical)  Finish line position: more than 1mm preclinical) supragingivally or subgingival (for preclinical)

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

Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form All Metal Crown Preparation

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  Adequate Reduction Clearance*

a. Functional cusps bevel

1.5 mm b. Non-functional cusps Occlusal Reduction 1 mm

c. Central Groove

 Uniform and retains original contour  Adequate reduction buccally and lingual 1 mm  Cervical 1/3 of facial and lingual surface converges occ. (6-10°) Buccal & Lingual Reduction*  Buccal surface demonstrates 2 planes

 Rounded line angles

 No undercuts*  Adequate wall convergence (6-100)

 Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm*

Proximal Reduction  No damage to adjacent teeth

 No undercuts*

 Type: Chamfer (buccal & lingual)

 Width: Chamfer (0.4-0.7 mm)

 Smooth and continuous finish line Finish Line Finish line position: 0.5 mm supragingivally (for preclinical)

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

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 exposure 2. 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. OCCLUSAL REDUCTION  Adequate Reduction Clearance*  Inadequate reduction,  Inadequate reduction (tooth still in contact or alterations are possible to no clearance) or a) Functional cusps bevel obtain desired reduction, or slight over-reduction (up to  Over reduced to point of exposure 1.5-1.7 mm 0.5 mm more than ideal). b) Non-functional cusps  1.3-1.7 mm for maxillary 0.8-1.2 mm for mandibular  Flat surface, or not following original contour c) Central Groove

1.5 mm  Uniform and retains original contour  Follow contour but not uniform

2. AXIAL SURFACE REDUCTION  Adequate reduction buccally 1.5 mm,  Inadequate reduction (less  Lack of reduction or extensive to the point of lingually 1 mm than 1 mm) exposure (Buccal & Lingual)  Cervical 1/3 of buccal and lingual  Converging more than 20° surfaces converges occ. (6 - 10°)  Angle of convergence (>10°  Buccal surface demonstrates 2 planes or <20°)  Rounded line angles  One plane (severely converging)

 No undercuts*  One plane (minimally converging)  Presence of undercuts  Sharp line angle

 No undercuts

3. PROXIMAL REDUCTION  Adequate wall convergence (6-100)  Angle of convergence (>100  Excessive convergence to point of exposure or <200)  Proximal contact opened with adjacent  Proximal contact not opened. teeth by 0.5 mm*  Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm  No damage to adjacent teeth  Minimal scratches on  Extensive damage to adjacent  No undercuts* adjacent tooth  Well-defined wings like structure  Presence of undercuts (mesially: pass proximal contact -  No undercuts distally: buccal to proximal contact)  Ill-defined wings like structure  Well-defined improperly positioned wings like structure.

4. FINISH LINE  Type: Chamfer (lingual)  Type: Chamfer (lingual)  Wrong design (type) Rounded shoulder (buccally) Rounded shoulder (buccally)  Width: Chamfer (0.4-0.7 mm)  Too wide (>1.5mm) or undetectable finish line.  Detectable narrow finish line Rounded shoulder (1-1.2 mm) or slightly wide (up to 1mm  Smooth and continuous finish line.* lingually or 1.5 buccally)  Significant irregularity and roughness.  Finish line position: 0.5 mm  Slight irregularity &  Finish line position: more than 1mm supragingivally (for preclinical) roughness in the finish line supragingivally or subgingival (for preclinical)

 Finish line position is appropriate for  Finish line position:  Finish line position is not appropriate for the case the case (for clinical cases). Equigingival or up to 1mm (for clinical cases). supragingivally (for preclinical)

 Finish line position is appropriate for the case (for clinical cases). Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Posterior Metal – Ceramic Crown Preparation

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  Adequate Reduction Clearance*

a. Functional cusps bevel

1.5-1.7 mm

b. Non-functional cusps Occlusal 1.3-1.7 mm for maxillary Reduction 0.8-1.2 mm for mandibular

c. Central Groove

1.5 mm

 Uniform and retains original contour Buccal & Lingual  Adequate reduction buccally 1.5 mm, lingually 1 mm Reduction  Cervical 1/3 of buccal and lingual surfaces converges occ. (6 - 10°)

 Buccal surface demonstrates 2 planes

 No undercuts*

 Adequate wall convergence (6- 0 10 )  Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm* Proximal  No damage to adjacent teeth Reduction  No undercuts* - Well-defined wings like structure (mesially: pass proximal contact - distally: buccal to proximal contact)

 Type: Chamfer (lingual)

Rounded shoulder (buccally)

Rounded shoulder (1-1.2 Finish Line mm)  Smooth and continuous finish line.*

 Finish line position: 0.5 mm supragingivally (for preclinical)

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 - The procedure will not be considered an MPE if you perform on of the following: 1. Unjustifiable over reduction to a point of exposure 2. 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

Area of Grading C R I T E R I A PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. Incisal Reduction  Adequate Incisal Clearance = 2mm*  Inadequate reduction, alterations  Inadequate reduction (tooth still in contact are possible to obtain desired or no clearance) or over reduced to point of reduction, or slight over- exposure reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal)

 Rounded line angles.  Sharp line angles.  Not parallel with existing incisal edge

 Uniform and parallel with existing  Uniform and parallel with incisal edge existing incisal edge

2. Facial & Lingual  Adequate reduction: facially (1.2-1.5  Inadequate reduction (less than 1  Lack of reduction or extensive reduction to mm), lingually (1 mm) mm) or slight over-reduction (up the point of exposure to 0.5 mm more than ideal). Reduction  Cervical 1/3 of facial surface converges  Converging more than 20° incisally (6 - 10°)  Angle of convergence (>10° or <20°)  Facial surface demonstrates 2 planes  One plane (severely converging)

 Rounded line angles  One plane (minimally  Concave cingulum reduction allows converging)  Over reduction at the cingulum. 1mm clearance  Sharp line angle

 No undercuts*  Inadequate clearance at the  Presence of undercuts cingulum (less than 1mm)

 No undercuts

3. Proximal Reduction  Adequate wall convergence (6-100)  Angle of convergence (>100 or  Excessive convergence to point of exposure <200)  Proximal contact opened with adjacent  Proximal contact not opened. teeth by 0.5 mm*  Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm  No damage to adjacent teeth  Minimal scratches on adjacent  Extensive damage to adjacent  No undercuts * tooth  Wings like structure (pass proximal  Presence of undercuts contact – mesially and distally).  No undercuts  Ill-defined wings like structure.  Well-defined improperly positioned wings like structure.

4. Finish Line  Type: Chamfer (lingual)  Type: Chamfer (lingual)  Wrong design (type) Rounded shoulder (facially) Rounded shoulder (facially)  Width: Chamfer (0.4-0.7 mm)  Too wide (>1.5mm) or undetectable finish  Detectable narrow finish line or line. Rounded shoulder (1-1.2 mm) slightly wide (up to 1mm  Smooth and continuous finish line lingually or 1.5mm facially)  Significant irregularity and roughness. (following the gingival contour)*  Slight irregularity & roughness  Finish line position: 0.5 mm in the finish line  Finish line position: more than 1mm supragingivally (for preclinical)  Finish line position: supragingivally or subgingival (for Equigingival, up to 1mm preclinical)  Finish line position is appropriate for supragingivally (for preclinical) the case (for clinical cases).  Finish line position is not appropriate for the  Finish line position is case (for clinical cases). appropriate for the case (for clinical cases). Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Anterior Metal – Ceramic Crown Preparation

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback procedures 0 2 0 1 2  Adequate Incisal Clearance = 2mm*

Incisal  Rounded line angles. Reduction  Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge

 Adequate reduction: facially (1.2-1.5 mm), lingually (1 mm)  Cervical 1/3 of facial surface converges incisally (6 - 10°) Facial & Lingual  Facial surface demonstrates 2 planes Reduction  Rounded line angles

 Concave cingulum reduction allows 1mm clearance

 No undercuts*

Proximal  Adequate wall convergence (6-100) Reduction  Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm*

 No damage to adjacent teeth

 No undercuts * - Wings like structure (pass proximal contact – mesially and distally).

 Type: Chamfer (lingual)

Rounded shoulder (facially)

Rounded shoulder (1-1.2 mm) Finish Line  Smooth and continuous finish line (following the gingival contour)*

Anterior All-Ceramic Preparation's Evaluation Criteria

Area of Grading C R I T E R I A PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. Incisal Reduction  Adequate Incisal Clearance = 1.5-  Inadequate reduction, alterations  Inadequate reduction (tooth still in contact 2mm* are possible to obtain desired or no clearance) or over reduced to point of reduction, or slight over- exposure reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal)

 Sharp line angles.  Not parallel with existing incisal edge  Rounded line angles.  Uniform and parallel with  Uniform and parallel with existing existing incisal edge incisal edge

2. Facial & Lingual Reduction  Adequate reduction: facially (1.2-1.5  Inadequate reduction (less than 1  Lack of reduction or extensive reduction to mm), lingually (1 mm) mm) or slight over-reduction (up the point of exposure to 0.5 mm more than ideal).  Cervical 1/3 of facial surface converges  Converging more than 20° incisally (6 - 10°)  Angle of convergence (>10° or <20°)  Facial surface demonstrates 2 planes  One plane (severely converging)

 Rounded line angles  One plane (minimally  Concave cingulum reduction allows 1mm clearance converging)  Over reduction at the cingulum.

 No undercuts*  Sharp line angle

 Inadequate clearance at the  Presence of undercuts cingulum (less than 1mm)

 No undercuts

3. Proximal Reduction  Adequate wall convergence (6-100)  Angle of convergence (>100 or  Excessive convergence to point of exposure <200)  Proximal contact opened with adjacent  Proximal contact not opened. teeth by 0.5 mm*  Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm  No damage to adjacent teeth  Minimal scratches on adjacent  Extensive damage to adjacent  No undercuts* tooth  Presence of undercuts  No undercuts

4. Finish Line  Type: Rounded shoulder  Type: Rounded shoulder  Wrong design (type)  Width: 1-1.2 mm  Detectable narrow finish line or  Too wide (>1.5mm) or undetectable finish slightly wide (up to 1.5mm) line.

 Slight irregularity & roughness  Significant irregularity and roughness.  Smooth and continuous finish line in the finish line (following the gingival contour)*

 Finish line position: 0.5 mm  Finish line position: more than 1mm supragingivally (for preclinical)  Finish line position: supragingivally or subgingival (for Equigingival, up to 1mm preclinical) supragingivally (for preclinical)  Finish line position is appropriate for  Finish line position is not appropriate for the the case (for clinical cases). case (for clinical cases).  Finish line position is appropriate for the case (for clinical cases). Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Anterior All-Ceramic Crown Preparation

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2 Incisal Reduction  Adequate Incisal Clearance = 1.5- 2mm*  Rounded line angles.

 Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge

Facial & Lingual  Adequate reduction: facially (1.2- 1.5 mm), lingually (1 mm) Reduction  Cervical 1/3 of facial surface converges incisally (6 - 10°)

 Facial surface demonstrates 2 planes

 Concave cingulum reduction allows 1mm clearance

 No undercuts* Proximal  Adequate wall convergence (6- 0 Reduction 10 )  Proximal contact opened with adjacent teeth by 0.5 mm*

 No damage to adjacent teeth

 No undercuts*

Finish Line  Type: Rounded shoulder

 Width: 1-1.2 mm

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

Yes No Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form # Porcelain Laminate Veneer’s Evaluation Criteria Area of Grading C R I T E R I A PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. INCISAL  Adequate Incisal Clearance = 1.5-2mm*  Inadequate reduction, alterations are possible  Inadequate reduction (tooth still in contact to obtain desired reduction, or slight over- or no clearance) or over reduced to point of REDUCTION reduction (up to 0.5 mm more than ideal) exposure (when  Sharp line angles. indicated)  Rounded line angles.  Uniform and parallel with existing incisal  Not parallel with existing incisal edge edge  Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge

2. FACIAL  Adequate reduction: facially (0.3 -0.7  Inadequate reduction (< 0.3 mm) or slight  Lack of reduction in some areas or extensive mm)* over-reduction (up to 1 mm more than ideal). reduction (more than 1 mm). REDUCTION  Facial reduction demonstrates 2 planes

 Facial reduction demonstrates 3 planes  Facial reduction demonstrates 1 plane

 Rounded line angles  Sharp line angles 3. PROXIMAL  Finish line position just facial to proximal  Finish line position just facial to proximal  Contact area was not preserved. contact (contact area was preserved) contact (contact area was preserved) REDUCTION  No damage to adjacent teeth  Minimal scratches on adjacent tooth  Extensive damage to adjacent

4. FINSIH LINE  Type: Chamfer  Type: Chamfer  Wrong design (type)  Width: Chamfer (0.3-0.5 mm)  Detectable narrow finish line (less than 0.3  Too wide (>0.5 mm) or undetectable finish mm). line.

 Slight irregularity & roughness in the finish  Significant irregularity and roughness.  Smooth and continuous finish line.* line

 Finish line position: Equigingival, up to 1mm supragingivally (for preclinical)  Facial inish line position: more than 1mm  Facial finish line position: 0.5 mm supragingivally or subgingival (for supragingivally (for preclinical) preclinical)

 Lingual finish line: up to 1mm cervical to the  Lingual finish line: more than 1mm cervical to reduced incisal edge (in case of wrap around the reduced incisal edge (in case of wrap  Lingual finish line: 0.5 mm cervical to the design) with a minimal of 1mm distance around design) with less than 1mm distance reduced incisal edge (in case of wrap from the centric contact (for preclinical). from the centric contact (for preclinical). around design) with a minimal of 1mm distance from the centric contact (for  Finish line position is appropriate for the  Finish line position is not appropriate for the preclinical). case (for clinical cases). case (for clinical cases).

 Finish line position is appropriate for the case (for clinical cases). Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Porcelain Laminate Veneer

5th yr 6th yr

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2 INCISAL  Adequate Incisal Clearance = 1.5- 2mm* REDUCTION * (when indicated)  Rounded line angles.  Uniform and parallel with existing incisal edge

FACIAL  Adequate reduction: facially (0.3 -0.7 mm)* REDUCTION *  Facial reduction demonstrates 3 planes

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

 No damage to adjacent teeth FINSIH LINE  Type: Chamfer

 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).

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 - 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) Area of Grading C R I T E R I A PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. PALATAL  Even and adequate (i.e. fossa and  Inadequate reduction, alterations are possible  Lack of clearance cingulum) to obtain desired reduction REDUCTION  Excessive cingulum tapering (Compromised  0.5 mm clearance* retention)

2. INCISAL  1.5-2 mm short of incisal edge (to avoid  ≥ 3 mm short of incisal edge (adjustable).  Too close to incisal edge (undermined metal display though the tooth) enamel) EXTENSION OF PALATAL  Away from opposing occlusion  Opposite to opposing occlusion REDUCTION

3. PROXIMAL  Surface adjacent to edentulous area:  Surface adjacent to edentulous area: slightly  Lack of facial wraparound extending slightly facial to proximal short of the proximal contact EXTENTION contact (facial wraparound)  Extensive extension compromising esthetics

 No undercuts *

 Undercuts

4. CERVICAL  Type: Light chamfer  Type: Light chamfer  Wrong design (type) FINSIH LINE  Width: 0.5 mm  Width: More than 0.5 up to 1 mm  Deep chamfer > 1mm  Position: 0.5-1mm supragingival  Too high occlusally  Subgingival finish line

 Smooth and continuous finish line*  Finish line is slightly irregular & rough in Significant irregularity and roughness some areas  Follows gingival contour  Does not follow gingival contour (not  Does not follow gingival contour. but still correctable) adjustable

5. PATH OF  One path of insertion (for maximum  Slight converging walls  Extensive convergence (a range of insertions) resistance to dislodgment; prepare parallel INSERTION walls)

6. RETENTION  Vertical steps (flat notches or ledges)  Slightly shallow ledges  Lack of grooves AND  Short grooves:  Shallow grooves (cingulum groove)  Too wide, too deep, too long or diverging RESISTANCE grooves. - In the vicinity of the wraparound FEATURES (proximal groove)

- In opposite side of cingulum (cingulum groove) Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Resin Bonded Bridges

5th yr 6th yr

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2 PALATAL  Even and adequate (i.e. fossa and cingulum) REDUCTION  0.5 mm clearance*

INCISAL  1.5-2 mm short of incisal edge (to avoid metal display though the EXTENSION OF tooth) PALATAL  Away from opposing occlusion REDUCTION

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

 No undercuts *

CERVICAL  Type: Light chamfer FINSIH LINE  Width: 0.5 mm

 Position: 0.5-1mm supragingival  Smooth and continuous finish line

 Follows gingival contour.*

PATH OF  One path of insertion (for maximum resistance to INSERTION dislodgment; prepare parallel walls)

RETENTION  Vertical steps (flat notches or ledges) AND RESISTANCE  Short grooves: FEATURES - In the vicinity of the wraparound (proximal groove)

- In opposite side of cingulum (cingulum groove)

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

Yes No Provisional Restoration's Evaluation Criteria C R I T E R I A Area of Grading Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. MARGINS  All margins fit accurately.  0.5 mm open or overhang in one  0.5 mm open or overhang in more surface than one surface and/or open margin by more than 1mm. 2. PROXIMAL  Location:  Minimal deviation from the ideal  Significant deviation from the ideal CONTACTS Posterior proximal contact should be at position position junction of occlusal and mid 1/3  Size: Should be approximately  Broad contact that doesn’t obliterate  Too broad contact that obliterate the - 2 mm occluso cervical gingival embrasure embrasure - 2 mm buccolingual  Tightness:  Open proximal contacts or excessively Floss should snap pass the contact without  Proximal contact are slightly light or tight that the provisional does not seat heavy on one or both sides excessive resistance 3. OCCLUSION  Exhibit proper occlusal morphology  improper occlusal morphology

 Proper occlusal contacts in maximum  Proper occlusal contacts in maximum  Infra or supra occlusion in maximum intercuspation and lack of intercuspation and lack of interferences intercuspation or presence of any interferences during eccentric during eccentric movements. interference during eccentric movements. movements. 4. AXIAL  Proper axial contour with properly  Slightly over contoured or under  Excessively over contoured or /under CONTOURS (Buccal & positioned height of contour. contoured restoration. contoured restoration. Lingual) 5. INTERNAL  Retentive  Retentive  Non-retentive ADAPTATION &  Stable  Stable  Lack of stability  Free of defects  Minimally defective fitting surface  Significantly defective fitting surface STABILITY (Fit)

6. PONTIC  Ideal pontic shape and design for the  Non-ideal pontic shape and design  Improper shape and/or design which DESIGN (when particular situation was selected. which does not interfere with the interfere with the performance of performance of adequate oral hygiene by applicable) the patient. adequate oral hygiene by the patient  Properly shaped embrasures. (e.g. saddle-shaped pontic)  Improperly shaped embrasures but still  Improperly shaped embrasures which allow proper oral hygiene by the patient. interfere with the performance of adequate oral hygiene by the patient. 7. FINISH & Smooth, free of pits, porosity and other Minimal roughness or presence of slight Excessive roughness, porosity and/or POLISH defects porosity. irregularity. Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Provisional Restoration

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2 Margins  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 Proper axial contour with properly (Buccal & Lingual) positioned height of contour. Internal Adaptation  Retentive & Stability (Fit)  Stable Free of defects Pontic Design (for  Ideal pontic shape and design for fixed dental the particular situation was prosthesis) selected.

Properly shaped embrasures. Finish and Polish Smooth, free of pits, porosity and other defects

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

Final Impression Evaluation Criteria

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

1. EXACT  Record of fine details of prepared  Record of fine details of prepared  Failure to record details of RECORD tooth/teeth.* teeth prepared teeth  Record of unprepared teeth  Lack to include clearly unprepared  Lack to include clearly unprepared structures immediately apical to tooth structure in one surface tooth structure in more than one the margins apical to margins surface apical to margins

2. NO VOIDS  Free of voids  Free of any marginal voids.  Presence of any marginal void.

 Free of tears and any  Free of tears and any  Presence of any tear and/or imperfections imperfections imperfection.

 No tray show  Slight tray show in some areas  Tray show in relation to the away from the prepared tooth/teeth occlusal surface of the prepared and away from the occlusal tooth/teeth and/or the occlusal surface of the unprepared teeth. surface of the unprepared teeth. 3. IMPRESION  Impression material adherent to ______ Lack of impression/tray adherence MATERIAL and supported by the tray.  Impression material is not SUPPORT & supported by the tray. ADHERENCE TO THE TRAY Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Final Impression

5th yr 6th yr

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2 Exact 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  Impression material should be supported by tray* Material I Support & Adherence to the tray

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

Metal Try-in Evaluation Criteria

C R I T E R I A Area of Grading Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)  Proximal contacts were checked (if in ______ Proximal contacts were not checked (if metal) with dental floss* in metal). 1. Proximal Contacts  Any discrepancy (open or tight  Any discrepancy (open or tight contact) contact) was detected and adjusted, if was not detected and/or adjusted (if possible. possible).

 Metal structure seating was ______ Restoration seating was not checked on checked on the cast and intraorally. the cast and/or intraorally. 2. Metal Framework  Rocking, if any, was detected and  Rocking, if any, was not detected and/or Seating adjusted (if possible).* not adjusted (if possible).

 Marginal adaptation was checked ______ Marginal adaptation was not checked on on the cast and intraorally. the cast and intraorally. 3. Marginal Adaptation  Marginal discrepancy, if any, was  Marginal discrepancy, if any, was not identified and adjusted (if possible).* identified and/or not adjusted (if possible). ______ If in metal: Occlusal interferences and/or  If in metal: Occlusion was checked lack of stable intercuspation were not for proper stable tripod occlusal detected. contacts in maximum intercuspation and no occlusal interferences in all excursions.* 4. Occlusion  Necessary adjustment was performed, if indicated.  Necessary adjustment, was not performed, if indicated.  If occlusal porcelain: adequate clearance and proper metal/porcelain  If occlusal porcelain: adequate clearance junction were checked. and proper metal/porcelain junction were not checked.

 Embrasures and contours were ______ Embrasures and contours were not 5. Contour evaluated for the proper size of the evaluated for the proper size of the embrasures and connectors. embrasures and connectors.. Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Metal Try-In

5th yr 6th yr

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

Infection control Surfaces are clean, no visible littering, disinfected, properly wrapped Yes No Student communicates efficiently with patient and instructor using clear words Communication skills Yes No and logical sequence Student knows the principles of the procedure and material selection and Knowledge Yes No answers instructor’s questions correctly with justification

Clinical Procedure Evaluation : 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student Steps and Evaluation Instructor self- procedures Criteria evaluation evaluation 0 1 2 0 1 2 Proximal  Proxim Feedback Contacts al contact s were checke d (if in metal) with dental floss*  Any discrep ancy (open or tight contact ) was detecte d and adjuste d, if possibl e.  Me tal structur e seating was checke d on the cast and Cast intraora lly. Seating  Rockin g, if any, was detecte d and adjuste d (if possibl e). *

 Ma rginal adaptati on was checke d on the cast and intraora lly. Marginal  Margin Adaptation al discrep ancy, if any, was identifi ed and adjuste d (if possibl e).*

Occlusion  If in metal: Occlusi on was checke d for proper stable tripod occlusa l contact s in maxim um intercus pation and no occlusa l interfer ences in all excursi ons. *

 Necess ary adjustm ent was perfor med, if indicate d.

 If occlusa l porcela in: adequat e clearan ce and proper metal/p orcelai n junctio n were checke d.

 Embras ures and contour s were evaluat ed for the Contour proper size of the embras ures and connect ors.

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 #13 Porcelain Try-in Evaluation Criteria

C R I T E R I A Area of Grading Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)  Proximal contacts were checked with dental  Proximal contacts were not checked floss and any 1. Proximal Contacts and any discrepancy (open or tight discrepancy (open ______contact) was not detected. or tight contact) was detected and adjusted, if possible.

 Restoration seating was checked  Restoration seating was not checked on the cast and on the cast and/or Intraorally. intraorally. 2.Restoration Seating ______ Rocking, if any, was not detected  Any rocking, if and/or adjusted. any, was detected and adjusted, if possible.

3.Marginal Adaptation  Marginal ______ Marginal adaptation was not checked adaptation was on the cast and intraorally. checked on the cast and intraorally.  Any marginal discrepancy, if any, was not identified and/or not adjusted (if  Any marginal possible). discrepancy was identified and adjusted (if possible).

 Occlusion was checked for proper  Occlusion was not checked. stable tripod occlusal contacts in  Lack of stable tripod occlusal contacts maximum in maximum intercuspation, which 4.Occlusion intercuspation ______was not dentected.  No  Interferences in protrusive or lateral interferences in excursions. protrusive and lateral excursions.

 Contour was checked and  Contour was not checked. evaluated. 5.Contour ______ Necessary adjustments, if any, were  Necessary not performed. adjustments, if any, were performed.

 Esthetics and phonetics were  Esthetics and phonetics were not checked. checked. 6.Esthetics and Phonetics ______ Patient approval  Patient approval was not obtained. was obtained. Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Porcelain Try-In

5th yr 6th yr

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Instructor Steps and Feedback Evaluation Criteria evaluation evaluation procedures 0 1 2 0 1 2  Proximal contacts were checked with dental floss and Proximal Contacts* any discrepancy (open or tight contact) was detected and adjusted, if possible.

 Restoration seating was checked on the cast and intraorally. Restoration Seating*  Any rocking if any, was detected and adjusted, if possible.

 Marginal adaptation was checked on the case and Marginal intraorally. Adaptation*  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 was checked and evaluated. Contour  Necessary adjustments, if any, were performed.

 Esthetics and phonetics were Esthetics and checked. Phonetics*  Patient approval was obtained.

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.

Trial Cementation Evaluation Criteria

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

1. Cement  Proper selection of the ______ Improperly selected provisional selection provisional cement cement.

 Completely seated restoration ______ Improperly seated restoration with no occlusal alteration causing occlusal interferences and 2. Restoration marginal discrepancy Seating 

 No cement remnants around  Slight cement remnants around  Messy cement remnants around 3. Excess restoration(s) and pontic restoration and under pontic restoration and under pontic Cement tissue surface Removal

4. Oral Hygiene  Demonstrates oral hygiene ______ Failure to demonstrate oral Instructions instructions (including, the hygiene instructions use of floss threader and proxy brush when indicated). Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Trial Cementation

5th yr 6th yr

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  Proper selection of the provisional Cement selection cement

 Completely seated restoration with Restoration Seating* no occlusal alteration

 No cement remnants around Excess Cement restoration(s) and pontic tissue Removal* surface

 Demonstrates oral hygiene instructions (including, the use of Oral Hygiene floss threader and proxy brush Instructions* when indicated).

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

Yes No Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form #14

Final Cementation Evaluation Criteria

C R I T E R I A Area of Grading Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)  Proper cement  Improper cement selection or selection and ______manipulation Cement Selection manipulation

 Restoration  Improperly seated restoration with completely seated occlusal interferences and ______Restoration Seating marginal discrepancy  No alteration of occlusion

 No cement remnants around  Messy cement remnants around restoration(s) and ______restoration and under pontic Excess Cement Removal pontic tissue surface  Demonstrates oral  Failure to demonstrate oral hygiene hygiene instructions instructions (including, the use ______Oral Hygiene Instructions of floss threader and proxy brush when indicated). Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Final Cementation

5th yr 6th yr

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  Proper cement selection and manipulation Cement Selection*

 Restoration completely seated Restoration Seating*  No alteration of occlusion

 No cement remnants around Excess Cement restoration(s) and pontic tissue surface Removal*

 Demonstrates oral hygiene instructions (including, the use of Oral Hygiene floss threader and proxy brush Instructions* when indicated).

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

Yes No Cast Post and Core

C R I T E R I A PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)  Adequate coronal tooth reduction. ______ Inadequate reduction of coronal tooth structure.  All unsupported tooth structure was removed.  Unsupported tooth structure not removed  Part of remaining coronal tissue is prepared perpendicular to the post (+ve stop against  Absence of +ve stop against wedging. wedging). 1. Preparation  Absence of anti-rotation groove if of coronal  Part of remaining coronal tissue is prepared insufficient tooth structure remains tooth parallel to the post (+ve stop against rotation) structure  Internal or external undercuts that will (Anti-rotation groove if insufficient tooth prevent withdrawal of the pattern structure remains)  No internal or external undercuts 

 No sharp angles

 Smooth finish line

2. Removal of  At least 3-5 mm good apical seal of gutta percha ______ < 3mm of Gutta percha left. Root Canal left. Filling Material

3. Post Space  Minimal canal enlargement to receive  Canal width enlargement exceeding ½ Preparation appropriate post  Canal width enlargement exceeding 1/3 diameter diameter at cervical area (less than 1mm left at cervical area (1mm left circumferentially of circumferentially of sound tooth structure) sound tooth structure)  Gradual taper  No undercuts or ledges that was created by the  Over tapered canal students during the post space preparation.  No undercuts or ledges that was created by the  Presence of ledges or undercuts that was students during the post space preparation. created by the students during the post space preparation.

 1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure ______ Ferrule not obtained when possible. obtained when possible.

4. Ferrule  Adequate ferrule thickness (at least 1mm) Effect  Inadequate ferrule thickness (<1mm)

Post fabrication Post fabrication Post fabrication  Dowel pattern extended to the full depth of  Dowel pattern is short by 1-2 mm to full length  Tight or loose pattern prepared canal  Short post length (> 2 mm)  Dowel pattern inserted and removed easily without bending, with tug back  Passive fit, without tug back

5. Pattern  Conforms to shape of canal space with no defects or porosities Build-Up  Minimal porosities or defects (correctable) Core fabrication Core fabrication  Significantly over-contoured or under-  Properly shaped to receive final restoration contoured contoured core build-up. Core fabrication  Conform to the shape of the optimal tooth  Slightly over-contoured core build-up.  Marked discrepancy at the tooth /core preparation. junction

 Accurate fit of core/tooth interface

6. Post & Core -Student evaluated the cast post and core and ______-Student did not evaluate the cast post and core identified deficiencies: and/or failed to identify deficiencies: Try-In Post  Fits accurately to full length

 Passively fit without interfering

 No casting defects

Core  Properly shaped for minimal adjustments to receive final restoration -Student did not performe the necessary adjustment/s, when needed and possible.  Accurate fit of core/tooth interface

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

 Proper type of cement was selected.  Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface or  Improper selection of cement. core/sound tooth structure interface by 0.5mm or  Accurately seated. less.  Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface or core/sound tooth structure interface (by  Luting agent fill all dead space within the root more than 0.5mm) 7. Cementation canal system.  Slight voids were observed in the post-insertion radiograph.  No voids.  Cement residues exists  Excess cement was removed. Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Cast Post and Core

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  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 Preparation of against rotation) coronal tooth  (Anti-rotation groove if insufficient tooth structure structure remains)

 No internal or external undercuts*

 All unsupported tooth structure is removed

 No sharp angles

 Smooth finish line  3-5 mm good apical seal of gutta Removal of Root percha* Canal Filling Material

 Minimal canal enlargement to receive appropriate post Post Space  Gradual taper Preparation  No undercuts or ledges that was created by the students during the post space preparation.*

 1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure obtained when possible.*  Adequate ferrule thickness (at least Ferrule Effect 1mm) *

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 porosities Pattern Build-Up Core fabrication  Properly shaped to receive final restoration

 Conform to the shape of the optimal tooth preparation.  Accurate fit of core/tooth interface*

-Student evaluated the cast post and core and identified deficiencies: Post  Fits accurately to full length  Passively fit without interfering*  No casting defects Post & Core Try-In Core  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.

 Proper type of cement was selected.  Accurately seated.*  Luting agent fill all dead space within Cementation the root canal system.  No voids.  Excess cement was removed.

Yes No Prefabricated Post and Core

C R I T E R I A PROCEDURE Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0)  Adequate coronal tooth reduction. ______ Inadequate reduction of coronal tooth structure. 1. Preparation  All unsupported tooth structure was removed. of coronal  Unsupported tooth structure not removed  No external undercuts tooth  External undercut. structure  No sharp angles

2. Removal of  At least 3-5 mm good apical seal of gutta percha ______ Less than 3mm of Gutta percha left. Root Canal left. Filling Material

 Minimal canal enlargement to receive  Canal width enlargement exceeding 1/3 diameter  Canal width enlargement exceeding ½ appropriate post size. at cervical area (1mm left circumferentially of diameter at cervical area (less than 1mm left sound tooth structure). circumferentially of sound tooth structure), 3. Post Space  Gradual taper  No undercuts or ledges that was created by the  Over tapered canal. Preparation  No undercuts or ledges that was created by the students during the post space preparation. students during the post space preparation.  Presence of ledges or undercuts that was created by the students during the post space preparation.

 1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure ______ Ferrule not obtained when possible. obtained when possible.

4. Ferrule  Adequate ferrule thickness (at least 1mm) Effect  Inadequate ferrule thickness (<1mm)

5. Cementation  Proper type of cement was selected.  Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface by  Improper selection of the cement. 0.5mm or less.  No gap at post/gutta percha interface.  Increased gap at post/gutta percha interface by more than 0.5mm.  Luting agent fill all dead space within the root  1-3 small voids were observed in the post- canal system. insertion radiograph.  >3 small voids or large voids in the post- insertion radiograph.  No voids in the post-insertion radiograph.  Proper selection of the core material  1-3 small voids were observed in the post-  Improper selection of the core material. insertion radiograph.  Core properly shaped to receive final restoration  Core improperly shaped and does not conform to the shape of the optimal tooth provide adequate retention and resistance 6. Core Build- preparation. forms. Up  No voids within the core.  >3 small voids or large voids in the post- insertion radiograph.  Accurate adaptation at the core/tooth interface.  Gap at the core/tooth interface. Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Prefabricated Post and Core

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  Adequate coronal tooth reduction.

 All unsupported tooth structure was Preparation of removed. coronal tooth  No external undercuts * structure  No sharp angles

 At least 3-5 mm good apical seal of Removal of Root gutta percha left.* Canal Filling Material

 Minimal canal enlargement to receive appropriate post size. Post Space  Gradual taper Preparation  No undercuts or ledges that was created by the students during the post space preparation.*  1.5-2 mm of vertical sound tooth structure obtained when possible.*

 Adequate ferrule thickness (at least Ferrule Effect 1mm). *

 Proper type of cement was selected.

 No gap at post/gutta percha interface.

Cementation  Luting agent fill all dead space within the root canal system.

No voids in the post-insertion radiograph.

 Proper selection of the core material

 Core properly shaped to receive final restoration conform to the shape of the optimal tooth preparation. Core Build-Up  No voids within the core.

 Accurate adaptation at the core/tooth interface.*

Yes No Faculty of Dentistry Fixed Prosthodontics Division Oral & Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Dept Form # 8R

Wax Pattern Evaluation Criteria

C R I T E R I A Area of Grading Proficient (2) Competent (1) Incompetent (0) 1. Occlusal  Well-defined anatomy, with correct  Well-defined anatomy, with incorrect  Ill-defined occlusal surface anatomy cusp height & position. cusp height and/or position. Contour

 Well-defined facial and lingual  Slightly ill-defined facial and lingual  Did not follow facial or lingual contour contour and profile. contour and profile. and profile (too square or too round). 2. Facial & lingual contour  Correct height of contour position &  Correct height of contour position &  Incorrect height of contour position & and profile form. form. form. 

3. Surface  Smooth and polished surface (no  Roughness in relation to at least one  Significant irregularity or nodular surface texture scratches). surface.

4. Interproxima  Positive proximal contacts (with  Positive proximal contacts.  Open proximal contact. correct position and size) l contour and  Incorrect proximal contour and/or form. contacts  Correct proximal contour and form.

5. Margin finish  Smooth and continuous marginal  Roughness and/or irregularities in relation  Open or overextended margin. finish. to the margin of the wax pattern.  Negative or positive margin (in relation to  Correct margin position  Correct margin position. the horizontal axis)  Tripod contact for each centric  Slightly high contact in maximum  No contact or significantly high contact (functional) cusp in maximum intercuspation. during in maximum intercuspation intercuspation. 6. Occlusion  No occlusal interference of posterior teeth  Any kind of interferences between  No occlusal interference of posterior on working side, non-working side or maxillary & mandibular posterior teeth on teeth on working side, non-working protrusive movements. working side, non-working side or side or protrusive movements. protrusive movements.

7. Pontic and  Appropriate pontic design. ______ Inappropriate pontic design. connector  Appropriate connector design and size.  Inappropriate connector design and size. design (only for FPD) Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation Department – Fixed Prosthodontics Minimal Procedural Experiences (MPE) Evaluation Form Wax Pattern

Clinical Procedure Evaluation: 0 = incompetent, 1 = competent, 2 = proficient Student self- Steps and procedures Evaluation Criteria evaluation Feedback 0 2 0 1 2  Well-defined anatomy, with Occlusal Contour correct cusp height & position.  Well-defined facial and lingual contour and profile. Facial & lingual contour and profile  Correct height of contour position & form.

 Smooth and polished surface (no Surface texture scratches).  Positive proximal contacts (with Interproximal correct position and size)* contour and contacts  Correct proximal contour and form.  Smooth and continuous marginal Margin finish 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.  Appropriate pontic design Pontic and connector design (only for FPD)  Appropriate connector design and size

Yes No