Journal List > J Korean Acad Prosthodont > v.47(3) > 1034592

TOOLS
Yang, Cho, Jeong, Jeon, and Yun: Evaluation of clinical status of removable partial dentures
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2009;47(3):320-327.

Published online: 18 December 2009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2009.47.3.320

Evaluation of clinical status of removable partial dentures

Dong-Seok Yang, DMD, MSD1, Uk Cho, DDS, MSD1, Chang-Mo Jeong, DDS, MSD, PhD2, ∗, Young-Chan Jeon, MSD, DDS, PhD2, Mi-Jung Yun, DDS, MSD1

1Graduate student, Department of Prosthodontics, Collage of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Korea

2Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Collage of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Korea

Corresponding Author: Chang-Mo Jeong Department of Dentistry, Graduate School, Pusan National University 10 1ga Ami-dong, Seo-gu, Pusan, 602-739, Korea +82 51 240 7438: e-mail, cmjeong@pusan.ac.kr

Received 19 June 200926 June 2009       Accepted 30 June 2009

Copyright © 2009 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Statement of Problem

Although many efforts have been continually made to estimate long term prognosis of removable partial dentures, the complication of removable partial dentures was still found because of inaccurate fabrication procedure and improper maintenance care.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical status of removable partial dentures.

Material and methods

A total of 112 individuals with 153 removable partial dentures (35 - 87 years, 64 women and 48 men) were examined by intra-oral examination, diagnostic cast and radiographic examination.

Results and conclusion

The results of this study were as follows: 1. Length of service of removable partial dentures was 5.3 ± 4.3 years (mean), 4.0 years (median). 2. A total of 45 removable partial dentures were considered failures. The loss of 18 abutments of 369 was founded. 3. Type of arch, Kennedy classification and type of opposite dentition were found to have no influence on longevity and success rate of removable partial dentures (P > .05). 4. Most common major connector was the palatal plate in maxilla and the number of lingual bar and linguoplate designed in mandible were similar. 5. The circumferential type retainer was the most commonly used retainer. 6. Sixty-three percent of the class I and II removable partial dentures incorporated indirect retention into the design. 7. Approximately 81% of the removable partial dentures had at least one defect. Excessive wear of posterior teeth (27.9%), lack of integrity (23.2%), lack of stability (22.6%) were frequent defects of removable partial dentures. (J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2009;47:320-7)

Keywords: removable partial denture, clinical status, longevity, complication

REFERENCES

1.Christensen GJ. Making better removable partial dentures. J Am Dent Assoc. 1995. 126:1041–4.
2.Academy of Prosthodontics. Principles, concepts, and practices in prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 1995. 73:73–94.
3.Vanzeveren C., D'Hoore W., Bercy P., Leloup G. Treatment with removable partial dentures: a longitudinal study. Part I. J Oral Rehabil. 2003. 30:447–58.
crossref
4.Vanzeveren C., D'Hoore W., Bercy P., Leloup G. Treatment with removable partial dentures: a longitudinal study. Part II. J Oral Rehabil. 2003. 30:459–69.
crossref
5.Vermeulen AH., Keltjens HM., van't Hof MA., Kayser AF. Ten-year evaluation of removable partial dentures: survival rates based on retreatment, not wearing and replacement. J Prosthet Dent. 1996. 76:267–72.
crossref
6.Kapur KK., Deupree R., Dent RJ., Hasse AL. A randomized clinical trial of two basic removable partial denture designs. Part I: Comparisons of five-year success rates and periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent. 1994. 72:268–82.
7.Redford M., Drury TF., Kingman A., Brown LJ. Denture use and the technical quality of dental prostheses among persons 18-74 years of age: United States, 1988-1991. J Dent Res. 1996. 75:714–25.
crossref
8.Hummel SK., Wilson MA., Marker VA., Nunn ME. Quality of removable partial dentures worn by the adult U.S. population. J Prosthet Dent. 2002. 88:37–43.
crossref
9.Frank RP., Brudvik JS., Leroux B., Milgrom P., Hawkins N. Relationship between the standards of removable partial denture construction, clinical acceptability, and patient satisfaction. J Prosthet Dent. 2000. 83:521–7.
crossref
10.Kim JC., Han SB. Periodontal and prosthetic findings in patients treated with removable partial dentures or distally extending cantilever bridges. J Korean Acad Periodontol. 1993. 23:635–45.
11.Ban YS., Song KB., Jeong SH., Jo KH. Analysis of satisfaction with removable dental prosthesis among patents in private dental clinics. J Korean Acad Dent Health. 2001. 25:79–94.
12.Leempoel PJ., Van't Hof MA., de Haan AF. Survival studies of dental restorations: criteria, methods and analyses. J Oral Rehabil. 1989. 16:387–94.
crossref
13.Kratochvil FJ., Davidson PN., Guijt J. Five-year survey of treatment with removable partial dentures. Part I. J Prosthet Dent. 1982. 48:237–44.
crossref
14.Chandler JA., Brudvik JS. Clinical evaluation of patients eight to nine years after placement of removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 1984. 51:736–43.
crossref
15.Bergman B., Hugoson A., Olsson CO. Caries, periodontal and prosthetic findings in patients with removable partial dentures: a ten-year longitudinal study. J Prosthet Dent. 1982. 48:506–14.
crossref
16.Schwalm CA., Smith DE., Erickson JD. A clinical study of patients 1 to 2 years after placement of removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 1977. 38:380–91.
crossref
17.Curtis DA., Curtis TA., Wagnild GW., Finzen FC. ncidence of various classes of removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 1992. 67:664–7.
18.Owall BE., Taylor RL. A survey of dentitions and removable partial dentures constructed for patients in North America. J Prosthet Dent. 1989. 61:465–70.

Fig. 1.
Kaplan-Meier survival curve of all removable partial dentures.
jkap-47-320f1.tif
Fig. 2.
Kaplan-Meier survival curve of removable partial dentures in the maxilla and the mandible.
jkap-47-320f2.tif
Table I.
Distribution of age group and gender
Age Gender Total
Woman Man
group n % n % n %
30 - 39 1 0.9 0 0.0 1 0.9
40 - 49 5 4.4 3 2.7 8 7.1
50 - 59 15 13.4 9 8.0 24 21.4
60 - 69 28 25.0 21 18.8 49 43.8
70 - 79 12 10.7 12 10.7 24 21.4
80 - 3 2.7 3 2.7 6 5.4
Total 64 57.1 48 42.9 112 100.0
Table II.
List of examination and evaluation criteria
Examination method
Intra-oral examination
Model examination
Radiographic examination
Examination list
Patient
Age and gender
Prosthesis
Location
Design
Kennedy classification
Length of service
Experience of RPD wearing
Opposing dentition
Criteria used to assess defect of RPDs (Criteria of NHANESIII)
Stability
Retention
Integrity
Excessive wear of posterior teeth
Presence of temporary relining material/ tissue conditioner
Evaluation of prosthesis
Success
Failure
Loss of an abutment tooth
Abutment tooth with a mobility score of 3 or more
Rejection of RPD by the patient
Nonuse of RPD for mastication
Table III.
Type and distribution of major connectors
Maxilla n Mandible n
Palatal strap 11 Lingual bar 34
Ant-post strap 19 Linguoplate 39
Palatal plate 43 No metal framework 2
U-shaped palatal connector 2    
Unilateral design 3    
Total 78   75
Table IV.
Type and distribution of direct retainer
Type of clasp n Type - other n
Circumferential clasp 271 ERA 5
RPI 45 Magnet attachment 4
Other Roach 10 Telescopic crown 29
Ring clasp 1 Other type 4
Total 327 Total 42
Table V.
Incidence of indirect retainer according to type of arch and Kennedy classification
Arch Class I Class II Class III Class VI
n % n % n % n %
Maxilla 23 15 19 12.4 3 2 2 1.3
Mandible 29 19 18 11.8 4 2.6 0 0
Total 52 34 37 24.2 7 4.6 2 1.3
Table VI.
Distribution of removable partial dentures a for treatment failure according to criter
Mode of failure n %
Loss of an abutment tooth 12 26.7
Abutment tooth with a mobility score of 3 or more 5 11.1
Rejection by the patient 23 51.1
Nonuse for mastication 5 11.1
Total 45 100.0
Table VII.
Distribution of abutment loss according to type of retainer and Kennedy classification
Retainer type Abutment loss Total
Class I Class II Class III Class IV n %
Circumferential 7 6 0 0 13 72.2
Bar 4 0 0 0 4 22.2
Others 1 0 0 0 1 5.6
Total 12 6 0 0 18 100.0
Table VIII.
Distribution of removable partial dentures in success and failure according to type of arch and Kennedy classification
Arch Class Success Failure Total
n % n % n %
Maxilla Class I 30 66.7 15 33.3 45 100
  Class II 16 69.6 7 30.4 23 100
  Class III 4 100 0 0 4 100
  Class IV 6 100 0 0 6 100
Mandible Class I 35 68.6 16 31.4 51 100
  Class II 15 71.4 6 28.6 21 100
  Class III 2 100 0 0 2 100
  Class IV 0 0 1 100 1 100

No significant differences between type of arch and among Kennedy classification in each success and failure (P > .05).

Table IX.
Distribution of removable partial dentures in success and failure according to type of opposing dentition
Opposing dentition Success Failure Total
n % n % n %
Natural 32 69.6 14 30.4 46 100
CD 15 62.5 9 37.5 24 100
RPD 61 73.5 22 26.5 83 100
Total 108 70.6 45 29.4 153 100

No significant differences among type of opposing dentition in each success and failure (P > .05). RPD, removable partial denture; CD, complete denture.

Table X.
Distribution of removable partial dentures in success and failure according to years in service
Year Success Failure Total
n % n % n %
0 - 5 81 81.8 18 18.2 99 100.0
6 - 10 22 48.9 23 51.1 45 100.0
11 - 15 2 66.7 1 33.3 3 100.0
16 - 25 3 50.0 3 50.0 6 100.0
Total 108 70.6 45 29.4 153 100.0

No significant differences among years in service of removable partial dentures in each success and failure (P > .05).

Table XI.
Defect of removable partial dentures by Kennedy classification
Defect Class I Class II Class III Class IV
n % n % n % n %
Retention 46 20.8 17 20 3 25 4 17.4
Stability 52 23.5 19 22.4 3 25 3 13
Relining/ Tissue condition 14 er 6.3 5 5.9 0 0 1 4.3
Posterior Tooth w wear 59 26.7 27 31.8 5 41.7 4 17.4
Integrity 50 22.6 17 20 1 8.3 11 52.2
Total 221 100 85 100 12 100 23 100
TOOLS
Similar articles