Share This Article:

Clinical performance of removable partial dentures: A retrospective clinical study

HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:1312KB) PP. 173-181
DOI: 10.4236/ojst.2012.23032    7,155 Downloads   13,950 Views Citations

ABSTRACT

Removable partial dentures (RPDs) (conventional and implant-supported) treatment is considered a viable option to replace missing teeth as inexpensively as possible, but it has limitations. Objectives: This study reports the effect of gender and location (maxilla vs. mandible) on the clinical performance of removable partial dentures (RPDs). Materials and Methods: A total of 100 Patients who had RPDs delivered between 1990-1995 were evaluated. A 4-point scoring system was used to assess seventeen criteria. These criteria include acceptance, stability, support, retention, adaptation, occlusion, integrity, and design of the pros-theses, rest and rest seat preparation, occlusal wear, esthetics, phonetics, tissue condition, mobility of abutments, gingival and plaque indices. The data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U non-parametric statistical tests. Results: The results showed that acceptance of RPDs was rated the lowest. Other reasons for failure were poor retention, lack of integrity of the prostheses and inadequate adaptation. Retention and design of major connectors attributed to Mandibular RPD failure. Success rate of 75% was observed in male compared with 67.2% for female. Maxillary RPDs showed a higher success rate (78%) compared with the mandibular (70.1%). No significant statistical difference in Alpha scores between female and male patients and between maxillary and mandibular RPDs (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The clinical performance of RPDs showed a higher success rate in male patients compared to female patients and the maxillary RPDs showed a higher success rate compared to mandibular.

Cite this paper

Etman, M. and Bikey, D. (2012) Clinical performance of removable partial dentures: A retrospective clinical study. Open Journal of Stomatology, 2, 173-181. doi: 10.4236/ojst.2012.23032.

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.