Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Dentistry
Full Version
Prosthetic rehabilitation of a patient with congenital oro-nasal defect: A case report
Correspondence Address :
Seema Pattanaik
Address : Flat # 102, Vaishnavi Apartment, Mahatmanagar,
Nashik, 422007
Phone numbers Mobile no -09657671098
E-mail address : pattanaik_seema@ yahoo.co.in
The rehabilitation of the patients with facial defects requires a multidisciplinary approach involving a head and neck surgeon, a maxillofacial prosthodontist and a reconstructive surgeon. Here, we discuss a case of a mid-facial defect due to a congenital anomaly for which a sectional impression was made. A removable nasal prosthesis which obturated a oronasal defect along with an overlay partial maxillary denture for the correction of malocclusion was given to the patient till a definitive reconstructive surgery was performed.
Oro-Nasal, Defect, Sectional Impression, Overlay Partial Penture.
A multidisciplinary approach is required in patients with congenital anomalies, post-surgical cancer patients and in a few trauma patients. It involves a team constituting a head and neck surgeon, maxillofacial prosthodontist and reconstructive surgeon. In most of these cases, the planning and the preparation for rehabilitation is done prior to the surgery by using a coordinated approach of the entire team which is involved in the management of the cases. Making the impression presents the initial difficulty in prosthetic rehabilitation. Several techniques based on flexible, modified standard trays and sectioned trays have been proposed (1),(2),(3),(4),(5),(6). We present here, a case of prosthetic rehabilitation for a patient with a congenital oro-nasal defect.
A seven year old boy reported to the Department of Prosthodontics with severe midfacial hypoplasia with a oro-nasal defect. The chief complaint of the patient was disturbed speech, regurgitation of foodand an unaesthetic appearance. The patient had already undergone surgery for upper lip reconstruction but the nasal reconstruction was planned after two years. It was advised to maintain the patency of the nasal cavity with a prosthesis which would prevent its collapse. Till that time, he was to be prosthetically rehabilitated by a nasal prosthesis which obturated the oro-nasal defect and overlaid the partial denture for the correction of the dental malocclusion.
On extra-oral examination, a gross disfigurement of the middle third of the face was observed (Table/Fig 1). The intra-oral examination showed a large oro-nasal defect in the pre-maxillary region with a malocclusion (open bite) and carious, left, maxillary, deciduous canine and molar teeth. The oro-nasal defect resulted in a communication between the oral and the nasal cavities (Table/Fig 2). The main objective was to record the area of the defect accurately and to provide the patient with an interim prosthesis which would facilitate the closure of the intraoral defect, thus improving the swallowing and phonetics and maintaining the petency of thenasal cavity, as well as overcoming the psychological trauma. It was decided to provide a removable acrylic prosthesis which would obturate the oro-nasal defect and also serve as an overlay partial denture.
TREATMENT PROCEDURE
The restoration of the carious, left, maxillary, deciduous canine and molar teeth was done. A preliminary impression of the nasal defect was made with a modeling plastic impression compound (Y-Dent Impression compound, MDM Corporation, New Delhi, India). It wasthen acrylized by using a heat cure polymerizing resin (Lucitone 199, Dentsply, York division, PA.). As the path of insertion and removal was different for the nasal defect and the maxillary arch it was decided to record it by a sectional impression method. An acrylic nasal prosthesis having orientation grooves was placed in the defect. (Table/Fig 3). The impression of the maxillary dentate arch, along with the nasal prosthesis, was recorded with irreversible hydrocolloid (Tropicalgin; Zhermach Inc. products, California) in a perforated stock metal tray. It was removed separately from the mouth (Table/Fig 4), assembled outside the mouth (Table/Fig 5) and then poured with a dental stone (Kalastone; KalaBhai Pvt., Mumbai, India.). The cast was sectioned bilaterally at the canine region for the easy removal and placement of the pattern without the breakage of the working cast. A minimal palatal coverage was planned to facilitate the easy placement and removal of the prosthesis, which also avoided the need for a sectional prosthesis. The acrylic nasal prosthesis was trimmed according to the contour of the adjacent tissues and a wire loop was provided in the acrylic portion for its easy removal. A wax-up and teeth arrangement was done and a try-in was carried out in the patient’s mouth (Table/Fig 6). After acrylization, external characterization was carried out in the presence of the patient which was followed by finishing and polishing. (Table/Fig 7)(Table/Fig 8). The patient was given training on how to wear the prosthesis and about its maintenance. A regular recall was done till the definitive surgery was performed.
Congenital anomalies of the maxillae may result in a communication between the oral and nasal cavities, which may cause a difficulty in swallowing and the nasal reflex, unintelligible speech and an unaesthetic appearance. Along with this, it can also be psychologically debilitating to the patient. While the mandibular growth is essentially normal in a cleft patient, the maxillary growth is restricted in a downward and forward vector when the cleft involves both the primary and the secondary palates, thus exhibiting a restricted maxillary arch with an anterior open bite (7). The collective efforts of the maxillofacial surgeon and the prosthodontist have given these physically and psychosocially incapacitated patients some level of social acceptance. It is the responsibility of the prosthodontist to restore the lost aesthetics, function and speech to normal or near normal and to provide a prosthesis which should be simple to handle, easy to maintain, light in weight and convenient for future adjustments.
Ohkubo C (8) described a sectional stock tray system for making preliminary impressions which could be used for individual dental arches as well as for patients with microstomia or constricted oral openings. Benetti R (9) described the fabrication of a collapsible, maxillary, removable, complete overdenture by using a sectional impression tray technique and a custom-made palatal hinge mechanism for a partially edentulous woman with microstomia which resulted from scleroderma to assist the patient in removing the prosthesis. Geckili O (10) described a modified impression procedure and a method of fabricating a two-piece collapsible denture for a patient with limited oral opening as a result of the resection of a precancerous lesion on the maxillary lip which enabled the patient to place and remove the denture.
In the present case report, though the mouth opening was adequate, a sectional impression was made to record the nasal defect and the maxillary dentate arch together, which were having differentpaths of placement and removal. A single prosthesis was given to rehabilitate the nasal as well as the oro-dental defects by providing a minimal disto-palatal extension of the prosthesis. Thus, the need for a sectional prosthesis was avoided. The remaining natural teeth also helped in the retention and they needed to be evaluated for the restorative and periodontal requirements periodically to preserve the treatment. Polymethyl methacrylate resin was used for making a temporary prosthesis during the period of healing and wound organization as it had the advantages of being non invasive, cost effective, tissue tolerant, aesthetic, comfortable to use and easy to clean. The nasal prosthesis which was made for this patient had good aesthetics and it went unnoticed in public, thus allowing him to go about life without drawing attention to his oro-nasal defect.
A sectional impression was made to record a nasal defect and a maxillary dentate arch together which were having different paths of placement and removal. A single prosthesis was given to rehabilitate the nasal as well as the oro-dental defect by providing a minimal disto-palatal extension of the prosthesis. Thus, the need for a sectional prosthesis was avoided.
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com