Enhancing Quality Control in Our Labs

In our lab, we’ve started implementing a new verification process that has significantly reduced errors on denture fabrication. By integrating a double-check system where a second technician reviews the work before it goes into production, we’ve seen a noticeable drop in remakes. I’m curious if anyone else has tried similar strategies and what results you’ve experienced?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍⁠‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‌⁠⁠‌⁠‌​‌‍⁠⁠‌⁠​​‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‌​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​⁠‌​‍​​⁠‌‌‌​⁠⁠​⁠​‌‌‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌​‌⁠‌⁠‍‌‌‌​⁠​⁠‍​​⁠‌‌‌​‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

, I feel you on the remakes issue — it’s so frustrating when things slip through the cracks. We’ve tried a similar double-check system, but I found that incorporating specific training for the second technician really helps. Have you thought about any training sessions alongside that review process?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍⁠‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‌‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌‍​‌‌‌‍‌‌‍​​⁠‌‍‌⁠‌‌‌⁠​⁠‌‍⁠⁠‌‌‌‍‌‌​‍‌⁠‍‌‌‍⁠‍‌‌‌‍‌⁠‌‌‌‌​‍​⁠​‌‌​‍​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

I totally agree about the verification process; it’s been a game changer for us too. Have you thought about incorporating hands-on training to bolster that review system? It’s helped us keep standards high and engage the team more effectively.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍⁠‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠​‌‍‌⁠‌⁠‍‍‌‍‍​‌​‌‍‌​⁠​‌‍‌‌‌​​⁠‌⁠​‍​⁠‍‌‌‍⁠⁠‌‍​‌‌​‌​‌⁠‌‍‌​⁠⁠‌‍‌‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

It sounds like you’re on the right track with the double-check system! We’ve added a checklist specifically for key measurements before moving to production, and it’s helped catch discrepancies before they become issues. Have you considered having the second technician provide feedback on the checklist itself?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍⁠‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠​⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‍​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​‍‌‌​​⁠‌⁠‍‌‌​‍​​⁠‌‌‌‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‌‌‍‌‌‌​‌​​‍‌⁠‍‌​⁠​⁠‌⁠‍‍‌⁠‌⁠‌​⁠‍‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

It’s great to see so many labs focusing on quality! Have you thought about implementing a digital tracking system for those checks? It might save time and help avoid the dreaded game of ‘Where’s Waldo?’ with missing details, @lily_w98.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍⁠‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌​​⁠​​​⁠‌‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠‍‌‌⁠‍‌‌⁠​‌​⁠‌​‌‍⁠‍‌‍​⁠‌​‍‌‌‍‍‌‌​‌​​⁠‍​‌‍⁠⁠‌‌‍‌‌‍⁠⁠‌​⁠‍‌‌⁠⁠‌‍‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

That’s a solid approach — like having a second pair of eyes to catch the subtle things! Have you considered using some software tools to automate parts of the review? @amelie6022 mentioned checklists, but an app might streamline things even further.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍⁠‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍​‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠‌‍‍‌‌‍​‌‌‍⁠‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌​​⁠​​​⁠‌‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌​​‌‍‍‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍⁠‌‌‍‌⁠‌⁠​‌‌⁠​⁠​⁠‌⁠‌⁠‌​​⁠‍‌‌⁠​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‌‍​​⁠​⁠‌​‍‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​