[Downloaded free from http://www.ijdr.in on Thursday, July 26, 2012, IP: 125.16.60.
178]  ||  Click here to download free Android application for this journal
Letters to Editor
Why tooth carving?
Sir,
Many experts, after considerable years of experience,
are of the view that the study of tooth morphology is an
age-old exercise that serves no purpose in the present day
context.[1-3] Because teaching tooth morphology requires
expertise and dexterity, it is tiresome to teach in the first
place.
As an alternative, subjects like bioinformatics, molecular
biology and comparative anatomy can be taught for dental
students[1] in order to make them better versed in everything
other than dentistry.
A number of reasons could be cited against learning tooth
morphology. Firstly, learning tooth morphology can only
equip a student to become a good technician rather than
a clinician.[2] Secondly, because most of the restorative
works are performed by dental technicians, and as surgeons
or anatomists are never required to carve the maxilla or
mandible to learn the anatomy to perform corrective surgery,
dental students can become skilled surgeons (Bachelor of
Dental Surgery) even without learning tooth morphology.[1]
The suppositions are indeed a valuable argument against the
inclusion of tooth morphology for dental students (under
and post graduate students). Why? Dental technicians
can take advantage of precarved tooth materials and are
even blessed with learning without schooling (some of the
busy technicians were never enrolled in dental schools or
colleges in India). Furthermore, dental technicians need no
further knowledge regarding tooth morphology other than
identifying the exact tooth to be replaced. In view of these,
it is not essential for dental students or practitioners to learn
tooth morphology at the curricular level and that too by
expending enormous time and effort. Even when one learns
all the tricks in tooth morphology, there is no guarantee that
they could pass their examination successfully.
Similarly, teaching undergraduate students to learn all those
uncommon pathological lesions, which even our best experts
would not have come across in their busy specialty practice,
could equally make students taste failure at the examinations.
Fortunately, failure is nonexistent in most dental colleges
and “deemed universities” because the students are well
trained with the aid of photographs and dummy models or
internet learning, which would enable them to complete
their course successfully. But, unfortunately, they will
have to test their skills when they open up their practice
for their cosmopolitan patients. However, this should not
be a problem for most dental surgeons as they can afford
to purchase concerned specialist to perform the work or,
sometimes, even to identify a particular tooth (at the cost
of the patients). Therefore, a subject such as tooth carving
463
(morphology) shall be discarded from the dental curriculum
because one need not know the valleys and peaks as well as
the anatomy and curvatures of roots in a particular tooth
that may lead to waste of time and kilos of wax.
As a large proportion of our population lives below the
poverty line and is illiterate and lives in rural areas, it is
imperative that the dental curriculum should be designed
to make the dental students develop necessary skills to
become good practitioners later in their life.[2] How could we
achieve this? We can do so by incorporating bioinformatics,
molecular biology, etc. in the dental curriculum.[1] But again,
how could these subjects help the students in their private
practice? Nevertheless, this should help our students as we
intend to train them to become good researchers later in
their life rather than to practice the art of dentistry, although
mechanically, which requires mastering tooth carving.
Irulandy Ponniah
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology,
Tamil Nadu Government Dental College and Hospital,
Chennai - 600 003, India.
E-mail: salivaryduct@yahoo.co.uk
PubMed ID : ***
DOI : 10.4103/0970-9290.70783
REFERENCES
1. Sivapathasundharam B. Tooth carving. Indian J Dent Res 2008;19:181.
2. Baskar PK. Tooth carving. Indian J Dent Res 2009;20:130.
3. Rao A. Tooth carving. Indian J Dent Res 2010;21:146.
Author’s reply
Sir,
As the author for the editorial,[1] I would like to clarify
certain details with respect to the letter from Dr. Ponniah.[2]
It is never stated in the above-mentioned editorial that the
tooth morphology serves no purpose. Instead, the first line
is "Knowledge of dental anatomy or tooth morphology is
essential for the practice of any branch of dentistry." The
editorial is all about carving of tooth, more specifically the
root carving. I think Dr. Ponniah got confused with the
word “carving” and “tooth morphology.” They were not used
synonymously in the above-mentioned editorial.
It is indeed a hilarious thinking that subjects like
bioinformatics, molecular biology and comparative anatomy
are not related to dentistry.
I would also like to know the basis behind the statement that,
“failure is nonexistent in most dental colleges and deemed
universities.” I humbly request him to produce the reference,
Indian J Dent Res, 21(3), 2010