Columbia University School of Dental and Oral Surgery - Dental Columbian Yearbook (New York, NY)

Page 15 text:

excellence of mechanical details. It was soon realized, however, that mechanical beauty and excellence alone did not make an ideal restoration of a tooth or teeth. Dentists fi- nally realized that there were biological as well as mechanical requirements to be met by the restorations. In other words, the mechanical procedures were no longer to be considered as ends in themselves but rather as means to an end, which in this case is biological. Various methods have been used to attain this end but one being used today is the method of comprehensive diagnosis and treat- ment planning. In this way restorative den- tistry assumes its responsibility of rendering a real health service. Prosthetic work is correlated with other phases of dentistry and is not a separate en- tity in itself. Surgical and periodontal therapy are frequently vital aspects of prosthetic pro- cedure which insure the success and longevity of restorations. The restorations themselves are so designed as to elicit physiologic re- sponses from the tissues. Undue stresses are avoided on the remaining teeth and on the bone and soft tissues of the oral cavity. No matter what the scope of a case may be, whether the restoration of a single missing tooth or the restoration of a completely eden- tulous mouth, each step towards its comple- tion is carried out with the health and toler- ance of the tissues in mind. It is the responsibility of the dental gradu- ate to insure the future of dentistry as a great profession by a continued search for truth and an improvement of the service he renders. Contact with his alma mater, dental societies, research and publications will provide a res- ervoir from which to draw. It is hoped that the prosthetic training given to students at Columbia will provide them with an adequate background to evaluate this knowledge. It remains for the dental graduate to use his knowledge wisely and accept future teachings only after openminded and intelligent con- sideration. Joseph DiLisi D.D.S. Assistant in Dentistry George Schwendener D.D.S. Clinical Assistant I. Frank Boscarelli B.S.. D.D.S. Asst. in Dentistry Louis A. Cohn. D.D.S. Asst. Clin. Pro), of Dentistry Oscar E. Beder William J. Miller B.S.. D.D.S. A.B.. D.D.S. Asst. Prof, oi Dentistry Asst. Clin. Prof, oj Dentistry

Page 14 text:

prosthetic dentistry Until the establishment of the first dental school in 1844, dental education was based on the relationship of the apprentice to his preceptor. The teaching, mostly empiricism, of these dental instructors was a result of their own personal experiences, modification, trials and errors which of necessity were limited in scope and the young dentist ' s education was limited by his contact with relatively few men. Great changes have taken place in dental education since that day. The modern dental school, by its close association with a great university, is able to draw from all the latter ' s resources and provide a broad and scientific education for today ' s dental student. Prosthetic dentistry in its teaching has heeded the lessons of the past and has taken great strides in its contribution to better den- tistry. The trends being followed today can be said to have had strong impetus in 191 1 when the now famous and oft-quoted William Hun- ter denounced American dentistry by saying, among other things, Gold fillings, gold caps, gold bridges, gold crowns, fixed dentures, built in, on and around diseased teeth form a veritable mausoleum of gold over a mass of sepsis to which there is no parallel in the whole realm of medicine or surgery. It is generally agreed now that Hunter was not altogether justified since he used for his target the worst dentistry of the day but, nevertheless, it had its far-reaching effect. If it did nothing else, it helped guide dentistry away from its sole concern of esthetics. Prosthetic work at that time was done only to improve the appearance of the patient ' s dentition with little concern for any other fac- tors. The beneficial effects of Hunter ' s criti- cism were not seen immediately. The first changes were in techniques with emphasis on Gilbert P. Smith. D.D.S Professor of Dentistry Max A. Pleasure D.D.S.. M.S.P.H. Assoc. Prof, of Dentistry Georse W. Hindels f.D„ D.D.S. Asst. Clin. Prof, o.l Dentistry John J. Lucca A.B. : D.D.S. Asst. Prof, of Dentistry Robert E. Herlands A.B.. D.D.S. Asst. Proi. oi Dentistry H. Arden. B.S.. D.D.S. Asst. Prof, of Dentistry S. A. Bruno. D.D.S. Clin. Asst. in Dentistry

Page 16 text:

stomatology diagnosis and radiology The Division of Stomatology, comprising the Sections of Oral Diagnosis, Radiology, and Periodontology, has a number of functions. As its name implies, it is concerned primarily with teaching the science of the mouth and its dis- eases with emphasis upon the relationship to general body economy. The knowledge ac- quired during earlier years in the basic sciences is reviewed and utilized for the crit- ical study of oral disease. Every attempt is made to correlate instruc- tion current with the newer concepts and the philosophy stressed that continual study after graduation is essential for future progress. Through the Section of Oral Diagnosis it also serves as an interdivisional consultant group and emergency station. It strives to bring about a closer alliance between divisions thereby strengthening our teaching efforts. In addition to the scheduled undergraduate teaching, courses of instruction are arranged for all postgraduate students registered in the institution. n «- - G. Minervini W. Halpert. B.S.. D.D.S. A.B.. D.D.S. Clin. Asst. in Dentistry Clin. Asst. in Dentistry Lewis R. Stowe. D.D.S. Professor of Dentistry Edward V. Zegarelli A.B., D.D.S.. M.S. Assoc. Prof, of Dentistry John D. Piro. D.D.S. Clin. Asst. in Dentistry Evald Linder Inst, in Radiolog 12