Case studies.

What these are for

A case study is more useful than a gallery. A photograph shows a result; a case study shows the decisions — which material and why, what the records allowed, where a stage was added, and what would have happened had the case simply proceeded.

They are written for dentists rather than for patients, and they are written honestly. Cases that needed a conversation, a change of plan or an extra appointment are more instructive than ones that ran straight through.

Where a case turned on something a practice did — a preparation checked before recording, a provisional recorded before removal, a call made before preparing — that is the part worth reading.

Consent and attribution

Cases are published with the documented consent of the patient and the approval of the referring practice. Clinical images are used only where that consent specifically covers publication.

Practices are credited by name only where they have agreed to it. Where they have not, the case is written without identifying the practice or the patient.

That is a slower way to build a case study library and it is the only defensible one.

Contributing a case

If you have a case you would be willing to have written up, we would like to hear about it — particularly a demanding one, or one where something did not go as planned and was resolved.

There is a short submission form covering what we would need: the clinical situation, what was decided, the records, the materials, the outcome, and the consent position. Call the laboratory or write through the contact page and we will send it.

Photographs make a case study considerably stronger — see the photography guide for the series worth taking.

In the meantime

The Knowledge Centre carries fifty technical articles covering the same ground in general terms — materials, preparation, digital records, implants, laboratory communication and practice efficiency.

What practices say about working with the laboratory is on testimonials.

In this section