Cargando…

A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures

OBJECTIVE: This study conducted to satisfaction with conventional clasp-retained and attachment-retained removable partial dentures (RPDs) among patients with partially edentulous maxilla. METHODS: The crossover trial recruited 10 patients with bilateral free-end partially edentulous maxilla who rec...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Alqutaibi, Ahmed Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taibah University 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7479171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32982634
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2020.05.005
_version_ 1783580212622000128
author Alqutaibi, Ahmed Y.
author_facet Alqutaibi, Ahmed Y.
author_sort Alqutaibi, Ahmed Y.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This study conducted to satisfaction with conventional clasp-retained and attachment-retained removable partial dentures (RPDs) among patients with partially edentulous maxilla. METHODS: The crossover trial recruited 10 patients with bilateral free-end partially edentulous maxilla who received a conventional RPD for 3 months, followed by an attachment-retained removable partial denture (ARRPD) for another 3 months. There was no washout period between the two interventions. During follow-up, patients were requested to complete a patient satisfaction questionnaire. This 9-item validated questionnaire measured patient satisfaction with the ease of cleaning, ability to speak, comfort, aesthetics, stability, ability to masticate different types of food, masticatory efficiency, oral condition, and general satisfaction. RESULTS: The comparison of the two treatment modalities showed significantly higher satisfaction with the ARRPD than with the conventional RPD. The ARRPD was preferred due to the ease to clean, speech, comfort, aesthetics, stability, masticatory ability, and masticatory efficiency (p < .05). CONCLUSION: The study showed higher short-term satisfaction rates in patients with ARRPDs than with the conventional clasp-retained RPDs. The superior aesthetics of ARRPDs are recognized in conjunction with the restoration of the partially edentulous maxilla.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7479171
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Taibah University
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74791712020-09-24 A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures Alqutaibi, Ahmed Y. J Taibah Univ Med Sci Original Article OBJECTIVE: This study conducted to satisfaction with conventional clasp-retained and attachment-retained removable partial dentures (RPDs) among patients with partially edentulous maxilla. METHODS: The crossover trial recruited 10 patients with bilateral free-end partially edentulous maxilla who received a conventional RPD for 3 months, followed by an attachment-retained removable partial denture (ARRPD) for another 3 months. There was no washout period between the two interventions. During follow-up, patients were requested to complete a patient satisfaction questionnaire. This 9-item validated questionnaire measured patient satisfaction with the ease of cleaning, ability to speak, comfort, aesthetics, stability, ability to masticate different types of food, masticatory efficiency, oral condition, and general satisfaction. RESULTS: The comparison of the two treatment modalities showed significantly higher satisfaction with the ARRPD than with the conventional RPD. The ARRPD was preferred due to the ease to clean, speech, comfort, aesthetics, stability, masticatory ability, and masticatory efficiency (p < .05). CONCLUSION: The study showed higher short-term satisfaction rates in patients with ARRPDs than with the conventional clasp-retained RPDs. The superior aesthetics of ARRPDs are recognized in conjunction with the restoration of the partially edentulous maxilla. Taibah University 2020-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7479171/ /pubmed/32982634 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2020.05.005 Text en © 2020 The Author http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Alqutaibi, Ahmed Y.
A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures
title A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures
title_full A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures
title_fullStr A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures
title_full_unstemmed A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures
title_short A within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures
title_sort within-subject comparison of the conventional clasp-retained with attachment-retained removable partial dentures
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7479171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32982634
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2020.05.005
work_keys_str_mv AT alqutaibiahmedy awithinsubjectcomparisonoftheconventionalclaspretainedwithattachmentretainedremovablepartialdentures
AT alqutaibiahmedy withinsubjectcomparisonoftheconventionalclaspretainedwithattachmentretainedremovablepartialdentures