Prosthodontics
This page contains the documents that relate to the Dental Specialty Fellowship Examinations for this topic.
- Examination Syllabus
- Assessment strategy
- Link to the GDC Curriculum
- Link to the training syllabus defined by the Specialty Advisory Committee (SAC)
- Illustration of how the change to the curriculum impacts the examination certifications
- Part 1 SBA Sample Questions
Examination Syllabus
Assessment Strategy
GDC Curriculum and Training Syllabus
Training syllabus – As defined by the Specialty Advisory Committee (SAC)
Illustrative Examination Route
The image below is to illustrate the changes to certification as a result of the introduction of the new curriculum. The illustration assumes full time training. Trainees on the NTN pathway should refer to their TPD’s or Post Graduate Dental Dean for information about progression.
Sample Questions
Below are five sample Single Best Answer (SBA) questions selected from across the syllabus. These questions are designed to be indicative of the level, style, and cognitive demand of the examination and reflect the use of higher‑order clinical reasoning. They are provided solely as a guide and should not be interpreted as representative of the full breadth or specific content of the assessment.
You will be required to select the most appropriate answer from a choice of five answers. There may be images and/or test results included in the data provided for the question.
The examination comprises two papers of 90 SBA questions, each of two hours’ duration. There is no negative marking, and candidates are therefore encouraged to attempt every question. During each paper, candidates will be able to navigate freely between questions and amend their answers at any point prior to submission. Further information on the in-centre assessment experience will be made available on the website and in direct communications to registered candidates.
Question 1
A 29-year-old patient presents two years after trauma to UR1. The tooth is vital. A mainly labio-incisal direct composite restoration has failed twice by cohesive fracture within the composite, despite good isolation, satisfactory margins and no clear occlusal interference. Palatal enamel is intact and abundant labial enamel remains. The overbite is normal and there is no parafunction.
Which definitive restoration is most appropriate?
A. Bonded direct composite replacement using a palatal matrix and selective enamel bevel
B. Full-coverage lithium disilicate crown with circumferential reduction
C. Indirect lithium disilicate palatal onlay with direct labial composite facing
D. Minimal-preparation lithium disilicate labio-incisal veneer
E. Minimal-preparation indirect zirconia crown
The correct answer is D.
Justification: This is the most appropriate answer because the tooth is vital, the defect is mainly labio-incisal, the palatal enamel is intact, and there is abundant remaining labial enamel. That makes this an enamel-rich, adhesively favourable situation in which a conservative indirect restoration is possible. A minimal-preparation lithium disilicate labio-incisal veneer is a more appropriate definitive restoration than another direct composite because it preserves tooth structure while offering a more mechanically robust and durable indirect option.
Question 2
A 16-year-old patient is referred after orthodontic space redistribution for bilateral peg-shaped maxillary lateral incisors. The teeth are vital and unrestored; a wax-up with silicone index allows no-preparation additive reshaping, and a reversible repairable solution is preferred during continued growth.
What is the most appropriate care plan to advise?
A. Provide all-ceramic full-coverage crowns
B. Provide ceramic veneers
C. Provide direct composite build-ups
D. Provide indirect composite veneers
E. Provide metal-ceramic full-coverage crowns
The correct answer is C.
Justification: Direct composite build-ups are the best answer because this patient is still growing and the case is specifically described as suitable for no-preparation additive reshaping. Direct composite is the most minimally invasive, reversible, and repairable option, while also allowing easy modification if aesthetics, gingival levels, or occlusion change after orthodontics.
Question 3
A restored LL6 implant is healthy and well positioned. The patient has persistent brushing discomfort, a low smile line and less than 1 mm of buccal keratinised mucosa.
What is the most appropriate soft-tissue management?
A. Enhance crown emergence profile to support the mucosa
B. Increase keratinised mucosal with free gingival graft
C. Offer site-specific oral hygiene and review
D. Remove the implant and rebuild the site
E. Use connective tissue graft to thicken the soft tissue phenotype
The correct answer is B.
Justification: Increase keratinised mucosa with free gingival graft is the best answer because the clinical problem is symptomatic deficiency of buccal keratinised peri-implant mucosa (<1 mm) with brushing discomfort and not implant disease, implant malposition, or an aesthetic contour defect.
Contemporary implant soft-tissue consensus reports associate reduced keratinised peri-implant mucosa with greater patient discomfort and identify free gingival autogenous grafts as the standard surgical intervention to effectively increase keratinised mucosa width. Randomized clinical data also show that free gingival grafting produces a meaningful gain in keratinised mucosa width.
Question 4
A patient is planned for lateral sinus augmentation in the posterior maxilla. CBCT shows a well-defined, dome-shaped, non-corticated soft-tissue-density radiopacity arising from the sinus floor, measuring 9 mm in height, with adjacent circumferential sinus lining thickening of 3 mm. The ostium appears patent. The patient reports no nasal blockage, facial pain or discharge.
What is the most appropriate management before implant surgery?
A. Arrange non-urgent ear, nose and throat assessment before any implant treatment
B. Delay treatment and prescribe intranasal steroids before repeating CBCT
C. Proceed with sinus augmentation without additional sinus treatment
D. Aspirate or decompress the sinus-floor finding before grafting
E. Change to a transcrestal approach to avoid disturbing the sinus finding
The correct answer is C.
Justification: The CBCT finding is most consistent with a small asymptomatic antral pseudocyst / mucous-retention-type sinus-floor lesion with mild adjacent mucosal thickening and a patent ostium. Current review literature indicates that these lesions are usually benign and asymptomatic, and surgical intervention is usually not indicated. Implant treatment and sinus augmentation can generally proceed when there are no symptoms and no evidence of ostial obstruction or generalised sinus disease.
Question 5
A general dental practitioner asks a specialist prosthodontist for advice about a 34-year-old patient with localised palatal erosive wear of the UR3, UR2, UR1, UL1, UL2 and UL3. The patient has dentine exposure, persistent sensitivity and mild aesthetic concern. Interocclusal space is reduced, posterior support is intact and preventive measures have not resolved symptoms. The patient would prefer a conservative, lower-cost option if acceptable.
What is the most appropriate restorative management?
A. Continue non-restorative management with desensitising measures and review in 12 months
B. Restore UR3, UR2, UR1, UL1, UL2 and UL3 using the Dahl concept with localised additive direct composite
C. Restore the maxillary arch at an increased occlusal vertical dimension using indirect palatal restorations anteriorly and posterior onlay restorations
D. Restore UR3, UR2, UR1, UL1, UL2 and UL3 with full-coverage lithium disilicate crowns
E. Restore the dentition with full-mouth rehabilitation at an increased occlusal vertical dimension
The correct answer is B.
Justification: This is a classic indication for the Dahl concept with localised additive direct composite: localised anterior tooth wear, reduced interocclusal space, intact posterior support, and persistent symptoms despite prevention. Contemporary guidance and review-level evidence support direct composite Dahl as a minimally invasive, repairable and cost-effective strategy for localised anterior tooth wear.