Dan O' Rourke put out a challenge to our industry and the LMT editorial team and I are intrigued by his suggestion for a "Man vs. Machine" challenge and are discussing its possibilities. At present we're somewhat stuck on the logistics and would love to invite input from others in the community. Since there's a ready-made CAD/CAM group, we will post the idea for a challenge in that group. Please join us in inviting dialogue that would help us form a plan of action.
One thing that strikes us with regard to the "which is better" question, are the comments from Don Cornell, printed in our April LAB DAY coverage:
Automation and the 25-30% market contraction caused by the recession are helping to fuel what Cornell calls a move toward "good enough" dentistry for posterior restorations which is, in turn, driving the growth of full contour restorations. "Full contour is not just about something that's cheap-it's good enough in this application, in this space, at this price point. It's shaped like a tooth, it blends in and margins are good. When it comes to full contour, there are those labs that don't want to participate. They say "that's not who I am," but can you really afford not to participate?"
This concept of "good enough" is one to be reckoned with IF the integrity of the patient's restoration and oral health are not comprised.
For everyone who offers suggestions, please keep in mind LMT's necessarily unbiased role as "information disseminators" which means we need to be sure, as non-technical facilitators, that we aren't condemning any restorative option. — tagged Daniel J. O'Rourke