D
deleted659902
Last edited by a moderator:
Used microscopes cost considerably less than 40k. It is true that microscope dentistry is slower than "loupe" dentistry, but slower speed is made up in a sense with a higher treatment cost (justified via increased meticulousness). It's true that FFS patients can be "cheap," but at least they can afford the service and some are willing to pay the premium for VIP experience and quality dentistry. It's about confidently projecting the value of the proposed treatment and communicating effectively.
One of our faculty in the city who is extremely successful in private practice performs microscope restorative and heavily advertises it. So yes, there are patients that will pay for it and pony up the premium for it. They even implemented two days worth of seminar/practice for us to try it out during our fourth year. After using it, and what I’ve gathered from most of the classmates I spoke with, it just seems impractical for most. So yes there is a patient base that can make the investment worth it out there, you just have to be a very strong advertiser, but I would never do it myself.
One of our faculty in the city who is extremely successful in private practice performs microscope restorative and heavily advertises it. So yes, there are patients that will pay for it and pony up the premium for it. They even implemented two days worth of seminar/practice for us to try it out during our fourth year. After using it, and what I’ve gathered from most of the classmates I spoke with, it just seems impractical for most. So yes there is a patient base that can make the investment worth it out there, you just have to be a very strong advertiser, but I would never do it myself.
You can also use a cbct for endo... blood infusion bone particle mix into ext sites... rubber dam for all fills, laser for all class 5 lesions/impressions, all great options that are miles ahead more practical cheaper (can be debated) and produce quality results then what the original poster is suggesting.
Could I use a microscope a filling? Yes. Could I use a rubber dam for extraction? Yes. Could I use a cbct for a filling to make sure all decay gone? Yes. Is that unpractical? Yes.
Spend on your time on practical things rather then unpractical. The secret of a successful practice is keeping overhead low, being productive and keeping patients happy.
How much is your back worth to you? The answer might not be the same for everyone.You can also use a cbct for endo... blood infusion bone particle mix into ext sites... rubber dam for all fills, laser for all class 5 lesions/impressions, all great options that are miles ahead more practical cheaper (can be debated) and produce quality results then what the original poster is suggesting.
Could I use a microscope a filling? Yes. Could I use a rubber dam for extraction? Yes. Could I use a cbct for a filling to make sure all decay gone? Yes. Is that unpractical? Yes.
Spend on your time on practical things rather then unpractical. The secret of a successful practice is keeping overhead low, being productive and keeping patients happy.
My endodontist (friend) tells me that his back hurts just like mine does.How much is your back worth to you? The answer might not be the same for everyone.
It is a real thing. There are people in this country, who are willing to pay double to be treated by one of those specialists. Don't be so fast to judge something you know very little aboutNo. Just no. Is this a joke post? Even the gps that I know that have microscopes for endo wouldn’t do one for operative. This has to be a joke post.
FFS patients are unicorns now and patients care about the experience if they like or dislike you or if they like the hygienist. They could care less if you still use equipment from the 70s and they def wouldn’t justify paying more for treatment. It’s a bottom sum game bro. If they can go down the street for a private in office financing for 50$ filling versus your cash microscope 200$ fill they will always choose the cheaper option. If anything they would be be like ahh that’s why you charge so much for fillings, and then they go home and see flyer for 49$ exam free cleaning and fillings from local PPO mill.
Once you own a business you will understand the word overhead and the implications of a useless 40000 microscope. It take me 15 min to bust out a filling. With microscope you go way slower. So in the end you decrease your productivity. Nothing in this post makes sense. Sorry.
Last edit: you will learn to find out that FFS patients tend to be the cheapest patients there are, because dentistry without insurance is damn expensive. They don’t want X-ray/exam/build-up/ they will negotiate for cheaper price and also try to bargain with deals. There’s no way the cheapest patients will be willing to pay more for a microscope fill.
I have been lucky to witness someone who is very good at the microscope dentistry. The quality of his work is incomparable to any Loupe one. It was not at all longer, but the opposite
He said it is easier on his eyes and back - he used the chair with elbow support
Glenn A. van As, BSc, DMD, Dental Education
It is a real thing. There are people in this country, who are willing to pay double to be treated by one of those specialists. Don't be so fast to judge something you know very little about
It might sound like an overkill, but even during fillings microscope is helpful. Mostly during endo and prosthodontics cases. I never asked how he started, but said it will allow him to practice longer easierI like to keep things real. If the OP posted something to the extent of rubber dam dentistry only and marketing with transfusion platelets after ext with cbct for FFS patients, I would def say go for it. But giving someone the ridiculous false hope of doing class 1 and class 2s with a microscope is just plain silly. I’m sure there are 1-2 dentists doing this but there are more practical things to market. Just keeping it real.
Maybe try his course and you will see the difference and the potentialPerhaps he is just gifted.
Just as we all learned in dental school, some people are naturally gifted with their hands.
If someone has average or below average hands, even though they can learn, as dentistry is a skill, IMO they will never be as smooth or good with their hands as someone who is gifted. Seeing the image in 10x on a microscope, vs 3 to 5x with quality loupes isn't going to be the determining factor here, in operative or pros.
There's a dichotomy here between the folks who truly love dentistry and are excited about it, VS the dentists who are just trying to make a living in a tough profession, provide honest good service to their patients, and go home at the end of the day. It's hard for one to comprehend the other.
Most of us fell into the first category (idealistic and excited) coming into dental school, at least I hope so. A few years out in the world of hard knocks and I bet a majority find themselves in the second camp. I certainly have. Don't knock Rainee for not being at all interested in adding complexity to his procedures without a proportionate benefit in outcomes. A few years out there paying the bills and dealing with the public day in and day out, and you may feel exactly the same way. It's not the same thing as being casual about quality of care.
Just to reiterate, I think the main rationale behind incorporating a microscope into day-to-day dentistry should be to prevent back and neck injuries or at the very least to decrease the risk of sustaining them. Obviously without adequate training and other ergonomics improvement measures including a better office design and more comfortable dental chair with armrests, one may not reap the full benefits of having a microscope. Improvement in quality of care as a result of improved ergonomics is a secondary effect and not the primary objective in obtaining a microscope.