Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry (J PROSTHET DENT)

Publisher: Elsevier

Journal description

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, now in its 47th year, continues to be a highly respected and trusted resource. With changes made to the Journal in 1997, readers now receive a publication that includes more clinical information and expanded use of color. The Journal is the official publication for 29 leading U.S. and international prosthodontic organizations and is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. It features timely, original articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. Color photos illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry ranks in the top 17% of the 4,625 scientific journals most frequently cited ( Science Citation Index ).

Current impact factor: 1.75

Impact Factor Rankings

2016 Impact Factor Available summer 2017
2014 / 2015 Impact Factor 1.753
2013 Impact Factor 1.419
2012 Impact Factor 1.724
2011 Impact Factor 1.324
2010 Impact Factor 1.309
2009 Impact Factor 1.215
2008 Impact Factor 1.139
2007 Impact Factor 1.009
2006 Impact Factor 0.879
2005 Impact Factor 0.748
2004 Impact Factor 0.735
2003 Impact Factor 0.527
2002 Impact Factor 0.568
2001 Impact Factor 0.71
2000 Impact Factor 0.787
1999 Impact Factor 0.767
1998 Impact Factor 0.829
1997 Impact Factor 0.642
1996 Impact Factor 0.775
1995 Impact Factor 0.718
1994 Impact Factor 0.534
1993 Impact Factor 0.327
1992 Impact Factor 0.521

Impact factor over time

Impact factor
Year

Additional details

5-year impact 2.15
Cited half-life >10.0
Immediacy index 0.27
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.46
Website Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, The website
Other titles Journal of prosthetic dentistry (Online), The journal of prosthetic dentistry
ISSN 0022-3913
OCLC 38234820
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

Elsevier

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Authors pre-print on any website, including arXiv and RePEC
    • Author's post-print on author's personal website immediately
    • Author's post-print on open access repository after an embargo period of between 12 months and 48 months
    • Permitted deposit due to Funding Body, Institutional and Governmental policy or mandate, may be required to comply with embargo periods of 12 months to 48 months
    • Author's post-print may be used to update arXiv and RepEC
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Must link to publisher version with DOI
    • Author's post-print must be released with a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License
    • Publisher last reviewed on 03/06/2015
  • Classification
    green

Publications in this journal


  • No preview · Article · Jan 2016 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The artificial iris of an ocular prosthesis should closely reproduce the patient’s natural iris. The traditional methods used to fabricate artificial irises typically include oil paints and cardboard. These techniques are time-consuming procedures that require strong technical and artistic abilities. Reproducing the iris by printing high-quality digital images should be a simple and time-saving process that closely reproduces the patient’s iris and requires minimal adjustment. However, we noticed that the size of the pupil varies according to the light conditions.
    No preview · Article · Dec 2015 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Conventional orthognathic surgery and orthodontic techniques occasionally fail to completely correct the occlusal relationship and esthetic deficits of patients with cleft lip and palate and severe midface deficiency. Prosthodontic rehabilitation is often required to establish adequate occlusion and provide a more proportional facial appearance. This clinical report describes the interdisciplinary management of an adult with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate who was treated with distraction osteogenesis using a rigid external distraction device for maxillary advancement and his prosthodontic rehabilitation with a dual path removable partial overdenture to develop definitive facial and dental esthetic form.
    No preview · Article · Oct 2015 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

  • No preview · Article · Jul 2015 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Malignant tumors in the nasal region may be treated by means of invasive surgical procedures, with large facial losses. Nasal prostheses, retained by osseointegrated facial implants, instead of plastic surgery, will, in most patients, offer good biomechanical and cosmetic results. This clinical report describes the prosthetic rehabilitation of a patient with nasal cancer who had the entire nasal vestibule removed in a single-stage surgical procedure in order to shorten the rehabilitation time. The nasal prosthesis was built on a 3-magnet bar and was made of platinum silicone with intrinsic pigmentation, thereby restoring the patient’s appearance and self-esteem. The authors concluded that single-stage implants may reduce the rehabilitation time to as little as 1 month, and the correct use of materials and techniques may significantly improve the nasal prosthesis.
    No preview · Article · May 2015 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: During the insertion appointment, the practitioner is often faced with the need to adjust ceramic surfaces to fit a restoration to the adjacent or opposing dentition and soft tissues. The purpose of this study was to assess the ceramic surface smoothness achieved with various commercially available ceramic polishing kits on different commonly used ceramic systems. The reliability of the cost of a polishing kit as an indicator of improved surface smoothness was assessed. A total of 350 ceramic surfaces representing 5 commonly available ceramic systems (IPS Empress Esthetic, IPS e.max Press, Cergo Kiss, Vita PM 9, Imagine PressX) were treated with 5 types of ceramic polishing systems (Cerapreshine, 94006C, Ceramiste, Optrafine, Zenostar) by following the manufacturers' guidelines. The surface roughness was measured with a profilometer (Taylor Hobson; Precision Taylor Hobson Ltd). The effects of ceramic systems and polishing kits of interest on surface roughness were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA, paired t test, and Bonferroni corrected significance level. The ceramic systems and polishing kits statistically affected surface roughness (P<.001).The polishing kit Zenostar on IPS e.max Press created the smoothest ceramic surface. No correlation could be established between the high cost of the polishing kit and low surface roughness. None of the commonly used ceramic polishing kits could create a surface smoother than that of glazed ceramic (P<.001). The inclusion of a diamond polishing paste step is recommended to improve surface smoothness (P<.001). The cost of ceramic polishing kits is not recommended as a reliable indicator of better performance of ceramic polishing kits (P>.30). Copyright © 2015 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    No preview · Article · Mar 2015 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Factors associated with implant periodontal disease of zirconia restorations such as surface roughness remain largely unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate how airborne-particle abrasion before sintering affects roughness and bacterial adhesion on the surface of zirconia. Thirty presintered zirconia specimens were divided into 6 groups of 5 after being polished with silicon carbide paper (1200 grit). A different surface treatment was applied to each group (no treatment [group Ct] and 120-μm alumina abrasion for 5, 8, 10, 12, and 15 seconds [A5s, A8s, A10s, A12s, and A15s]), and the specimens were then densely sintered. The mean centric linear roughness (Ra) was measured, and the 3D measurement of surface roughness (3D roughness) was determined. The number of colony forming units (CFUs) of Streptococcus mutans adhering to the surface was also examined. One-way ANOVA was used for data analysis (α=.05). Airborne-particle abrasion before sintering significantly increased surface roughness. Group A8s, A10s, A12s, and A15s showed statistically significant higher CFU/mL than did group A5s (P<.05). No difference was found in CFU/mL between group Ct and A5s (P=.230). Airborne-particle abrasion before sintering is a useful method of increasing the surface roughness of zirconia. Ra < 0.58 μm is necessary to inhibit the adherence of S. mutans to zirconia. Copyright © 2015 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    No preview · Article · Mar 2015 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: How the configuration of the NobelActive internal conical connection affects implant impressions is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to measure the effect in vitro of closed and open tray impression techniques for NobelActive implants placed at various angulations. Six NobelActive implants were placed in a master maxillary cast as follows: 0 degrees of angulation to a line drawn perpendicular to the occlusal plane in the first molar area, 15 degrees of angulation to a line drawn perpendicular to the occlusal plane in the first premolar area, and 30 degrees of angulation to a line drawn perpendicular to the occlusal plane in the lateral incisor area. Twelve open tray and 12 closed tray impressions were made. Occlusal, lateral, and frontal view photographs of the resulting casts were used to measure the linear and angular displacement of implant analogs. Statistical analysis was performed with a factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by the Tukey HSD test (α=.05). No significant difference was found in the impressions made of NobelActive implants with the open or closed tray technique (linear displacement: F=0.93, P=.34; angular displacement: F=2.09, P=.15). In addition, implant angulation (0, 15, or 30 degrees) had no effect on the linear or angular displacement of impressions (linear displacement: F=2.72, P=.07; angular displacement: F=0.86, P=.43). Finally, no significant interaction was found between impression technique and implant angulation on NobelActive implants (F=0.25, P=.77; F=1.60, P=.20). Within the limitations of this study, impression technique (open vs closed tray) and implant angulation (0, 15, and 30 degrees) had no significant effect on in vitro impressions of NobelActive implants. Copyright © 2015 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    No preview · Article · Mar 2015 · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry