A survey on perceptions of denture labelling and marking among dental practitioners in Australia – a pilot study

Abstract

Background: Denture labelling is an underutilised tool with many applications. Identification of patient’s denture can help to prevent loss of the appliance and be used posthumously in Forensic Odontology.

Aim: The aim of the survey was to assess the perceptions, education, and technique preferences of dental practitioners regarding denture labelling in Australia and identify any barriers. The survey also assesses the dental practitioners’ awareness of denture labelling and forensic dental identification.

Materials and methods: A questionnaire survey was conducted between “March 2023 to November 2023”. Participants consisted of general dentists, prosthodontists and dental prosthetists were surveyed across Australia. Participants who were recruited anonymously via email and information sheet through organisations including the Australian Dental Prosthetist Association (ADPA), Griffith University, the University of Sydney, and the Royal Australasian College of Dental Surgeons. The survey consists of twenty-one questions relating to the participants’ demographic background, the practice of denture labelling in their workplace, and awareness of denture labelling and forensic dental identification.

Results: Fifty-two participants completed the survey. Participants include thirty-three general dentists, sixteen dental prosthetists and three prosthodontists. 63.5% (n=51) of the participants were not taught to label dentures. The majority (67.3%; n=35) of the practitioners had never labelled a denture, whereas 15.4% (n=8) labelled dentures less than once a year, and 11.5% (n=6) monthly. Dental prosthetists and Prosthodontists are more likely to label a denture than a general dentist (p=0.003). Removable complete acrylic dentures were most commonly labelled (maxillary 94%; n=16 and mandibular 81%; n=14), with the preference for placing the label posteriorly at the palatal and lingual surfaces of the maxillary and mandibular denture (39%; n=26and 36%; n=25 respectively). The most significant barriers to denture labelling were time (mean score: 2.98 out of 5) and labour (mean score: 2.88 out of 5). The cohort was split on their exposure to forensic odontology (46%; n=24 said yes, 50%; n=26 said no);however, 71% (n=37) were aware that denture labelling could be used for forensic dental identification, and 75% (n=39) in support of mandatory denture labelling in hospitals and aged care facilities. 

Conclusion: Denture labelling remains an underutilised in Australia despite widespread recognition of its value.  Dental prosthetists and more experienced practitioners were more likely to implement denture labelling; however, time, labour, and cost were identified as key barriers. Although denture labelling is insufficiently covered in dental curricula, practitioners demonstrated awareness of its benefits and expressed strong support for making it mandatory in institutional settings.

KEYWORDS: Denture labelling, Forensic odontology, Prosthodontics, Dental practitioner perceptions