Free practice quiz
Prosthodontics Board Prep Course (Prosth): free quiz
10 questions from the program. See your score right away, then unlock the explanation of every answer.
- Question 1 of 10
A 66-year-old woman presents with the chief complaint, “I want whiter front teeth and a partial that lets me chew.” She has an ill-fitting mandibular distal-extension RPD, recurrent caries on several abutments, generalized 5–6 mm periodontal pockets with bleeding, missing mandibular molars, and high esthetic expectations for maxillary incisors with failing resin veneers. Which problem list best converts her chief complaint into prioritized prosthodontic objectives?
Prioritized prosthodontic synthesis
Correct answer: C. A defensible problem list separates symptoms, disease, defects, function, and expectations; biologic disease and abutment prognosis must precede definitive prosthesis design. B is incorrect because replacing the RPD before caries/periodontal control risks rapid failure. A is incorrect because it collapses chewing limitation, distal-extension support, and disease into an esthetic complaint. D is incorrect because implants are treatment options, not first-line problem-list entries, and require disease-control and prognosis assessment first.
Clinician Action: Diagnose disease/risk, order periodontal-caries workup and mounted records, treat disease first, and refer when periodontal or surgical needs exceed prosthodontic planning. - Question 2 of 10
A 62-year-old man seeks definitive restoration of a mandibular first molar after emergency endodontic access. The tooth has recurrent caries extending 2 mm subgingivally on the distal and lingual surfaces, an isolated 8-mm distal periodontal probing defect, a visible mesiodistal crack crossing the pulpal floor, and only one thin buccal wall remaining. Periapical radiograph shows adequate root length but furcation radiolucency. He wants a predictable fixed solution. Which prosthodontic recommendation best reflects tooth restorability criteria?
The pulpal-floor crack, multi-surface subgingival caries, furcation involvement, isolated deep defect, and loss of coronal walls eliminate predictable ferrule, seal, periodontal support, and crack control. B: crown lengthening/post cannot correct the crack or furcation prognosis. C: adhesive coverage after endodontics does not make a structurally cracked tooth predictable. D: correct because biologic and biomechanical criteria are unfavorable. A: extrusion may help an isolated margin but not combined periodontal and structural compromise.
Clinician Action: Diagnose nonrestorability, order periodontal/radiographic assessment, treat by extraction and replacement planning, and refer for coordinated periodontal or surgical care when indicated. - Question 3 of 10
A 68-year-old woman presents wanting “fixed teeth before my granddaughter’s wedding.” She has type 2 diabetes with HbA1c 8.7%, generalized 5–7 mm periodontal pockets, active root caries, missing mandibular molars, and a questionable maxillary right central incisor with recurrent endodontic symptoms. Mounted casts show unstable posterior support. Which treatment sequence is most defensible?
Active caries, uncontrolled periodontal inflammation, unstable support, and uncertain endodontic prognosis require phased treatment: disease control, stabilization, provisionalization, reassessment, then definitive care. A risks biologic and restorative failure by bypassing control of infection and prognosis. A preserves reversible options while coordinating periodontal/endodontic decisions and provisional esthetics. A may overtreat before disease control, medical optimization, and informed prognosis review. A finalizes occlusion and prosthesis design on unstable biologic foundations. Diagnose active disease and uncertain abutment prognosis; order needed periodontal/endodontic consultations and records; treat with stabilization and provisional restorations; escalate when systemic or specialty risk affects sequencing.
- Question 4 of 10
A 58-year-old man presents for replacement of a failing full-coverage crown on mandibular right first molar. The tooth has sound periodontal support, no mobility, adequate pulpal/endodontic status, and a short clinical crown with 3 mm axial wall height. Mounted casts show a broad molar diameter and limited restorative space. The existing preparation has excessive total occlusal convergence. Which preparation modification best improves resistance form while preserving tooth structure?
Short, wide molar preparations with excessive taper are vulnerable to rotational displacement; proximal grooves or boxes increase resistance by limiting paths of withdrawal and adding surface area. D is incorrect because greater convergence reduces retention and resistance. A risks biologic width violation and does not predictably improve form without periodontal coordination. A may further shorten axial walls, worsening resistance despite improving material thickness. The prosthodontic action is to preserve tooth structure while adding auxiliary features aligned with the planned path of insertion.
- Question 5 of 10
A 34-year-old woman presents with concern about shade mismatch and minor incisal chipping of a maxillary right central incisor. The tooth is vital, asymptomatic, and has a normal periapical radiograph. Proximal contacts are intact, no caries is present, occlusion is stable, and most facial enamel remains. She requests a durable but conservative esthetic restoration. Which option best preserves tooth structure while meeting the restorative goal?
Preserved enamel, vitality, stable occlusion, and limited structure loss favor adhesive partial coverage; enamel bonding provides predictable retention while avoiding unnecessary circumferential reduction. A full lithium disilicate crown may control shade but sacrifices sound axial enamel without a structural indication. A post-and-core is inappropriate because the tooth is vital and does not need intraradicular retention. A metal-ceramic crown can mask color but is more invasive and less conservative for an otherwise intact anterior tooth.
Clinician Action: Diagnose limited esthetic/structural need, order radiographic and occlusal assessment, treat with enamel-preserving adhesive restoration, and escalate only if caries, endodontic disease, or insufficient enamel changes prognosis. - Question 6 of 10
A 34-year-old woman presents because her maxillary central incisor crowns look “too short and gray.” She has a high smile line, thin scalloped gingival biotype, asymmetric gingival margins, and labially inclined maxillary incisors. Probing depths are 2–3 mm with no caries or mobility. She wants brighter, longer teeth and prefers to avoid orthodontic or periodontal treatment unless essential. What is the most defensible next prosthodontic step before definitive ceramic restorations?
Esthetic risk control
Thin scalloped tissue, high smile line, malposition, and margin asymmetry make prosthetic camouflage unpredictable; a wax-up and provisional trial tests esthetics, speech, contours, and patient acceptance before irreversible ceramics. D is incorrect because opacity may mask color but can worsen value, translucency, and contour compromises. C is premature; periodontal surgery may be indicated only after restorative preview and biologic-width evaluation. A is correct because provisionals reveal the real limits of prosthetic correction and support informed consent. B is unjustified without nonrestorable teeth and increases esthetic risk.
Clinician Action: Diagnose esthetic risk, order mounted records/photos, treat with provisional evaluation, and refer for perio/ortho consultation if the preview shows unacceptable compromise. - Question 7 of 10
A 74-year-old woman presents with soreness and repeated lifting of a new mandibular complete denture while chewing. She has a severely resorbed mandibular ridge, thin movable mucosa over the crest, adequate salivary flow, and borders that appear slightly short in the retromolar pad and buccal shelf areas. She asks whether stronger adhesive is the best next step. Which prosthodontic principle should most directly guide correction?
Support before retention
Complete denture success depends first on support: broad, accurate extension over primary stress-bearing tissues such as the mandibular buccal shelf and retromolar pad reduces tissue overload and functional movement. A is correct. D is tempting because adhesive may improve perceived retention, but it should not compensate for deficient support or borders. B can worsen instability if vertical dimension is increased beyond physiologic tolerance. C may reduce one displacement source, but indiscriminate flange reduction sacrifices border seal and stability.
Clinician Action: Diagnose support deficiency, order functional border/mucostatic assessment as indicated, treat by correcting extension and adaptation, and refer for implant consultation if conventional prognosis remains poor. - Question 8 of 10
A 63-year-old woman presents for mandibular removable partial denture planning after posterior tooth loss. Remaining mandibular teeth are #20–29, except #24 and #25 are missing; #18, #19, #30, and #31 are missing, and third molars will not be replaced. Periodontal findings are stable. Which Kennedy classification and support expectation should guide the initial framework design?
Kennedy classification is determined by the most posterior edentulous areas. Bilateral posterior distal extensions make this a Class I arch; the missing #24–25 region is one additional edentulous space, so it is modification 1. Class I RPDs are tooth-tissue supported, requiring attention to rotation, indirect retention, and altered support. D is incorrect because modifications count spaces, not missing teeth. A is incorrect because distal extensions are bilateral, not unilateral. B is incorrect because the posterior areas are not bounded by distal abutments, so they are not Class III tooth-supported spaces.
- Question 9 of 10
A 68-year-old woman presents because her mandibular complete denture is unstable. She has retained mandibular canines with 50% bone support, 3-mm probing depths, no mobility, adequate root length, and restorable endodontic access. Caries risk is moderate but she demonstrates good plaque control and agrees to 3-month maintenance. Interarch space is limited. Which prosthodontic plan is most defensible?
Core Content
Tooth-supported overdentures preserve periodontal proprioception, residual ridge support, and denture stability when roots are periodontally maintainable, endodontically manageable, and hygienic. C is correct because short dome copings conserve space and improve cleansability. D sacrifices useful abutments and proprioception. B increases leverage on compromised canines and is less appropriate for a largely edentulous arch. A may improve retention but is contraindicated when vertical space and hygiene access are limited.
Diagnose maintainable roots; order periodontal/endodontic evaluation; treat with reduced copings and overdenture; refer or alter plan if caries, periodontal disease, or hygiene control is poor. - Question 10 of 10
A 68-year-old woman presents for conversion of an edentulous maxilla from a conventional denture to an implant prosthesis. She reports poor confidence smiling. Her existing denture has a thick labial flange that provides lip support. Mounted casts and a diagnostic tooth setup show 8 mm from the planned implant platform level to the opposing occlusal plane, with limited horizontal space for hygienic contours. She strongly requests a fixed screw-retained prosthesis. What is the most defensible prosthodontic decision?
The diagnostic setup demonstrates inadequate vertical and horizontal restorative space plus dependence on a labial flange for lip support; a fixed implant prosthesis would risk overcontour, poor hygiene, and mechanical compromise. C is correct because the prosthodontist should revise the design before definitive treatment. B is incorrect because forcing a fixed hybrid by shortening teeth compromises esthetics, contours, and strength. A is incorrect because cement retention does not correct inadequate space or emergence profile. D is incorrect because taller abutments and pink material consume more space and do not predictably replace flange support. Clinician Action: diagnose with mounted casts and setup, order imaging/surgical consultation as needed, treat by matching components to available space, and refer/escalate when implant position or ridge modification must be replanned.
See why each answer is right or wrong
Enter your email to unlock the explanation of every question, free.