Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
The International Journal of Prosthodontics
IJP Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitter
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: IJP
The International Journal of Prosthodontics

Edited by George A. Zarb, BChD, DDS, MS, MS, FRCD(C)

ISSN 0893-2174

Publication:
November/December 1998
Volume 11 , Issue 6

Back
Share Abstract:

Precision Attachment-Retained Removable Partial Dentures. Part 3. General Practitioner Results Up to 2 Years

Owall/Jonsson

Pages: 574-579
PMID: 10023220

Purpose: The aim of this study was to analyze the techniques, production problems, and 2-year results of attachment-retained removable partial denture (RPD) treatment provided by general practitioners in Sweden. Materials and Methods: At a major dental laboratory, consecutive cases involving new production of crowns, or of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) and RPDs retained with precision attachments, were studied. Parameters of the dentition, crown or FPD, type and brand of attachment, etc, as well as early satisfaction by dentist and patient, were recorded using specially designed forms at the dental laboratory and questionnaires for the dentists. After 2 years, questionnaires were again sent out to the dentists to record complications and patients’ and dentists’ opinions of the results. The sample gathered totaled 83 constructions. After 2 years, responses for 57 patients, all of whom had distal-extension RPDs, were received. Most drop-outs in the study were explicable. Results: The most frequently cited reasons for using attachments were esthetics and need for crowning the teeth abutting the RPD. McCollum rigid slide attachment was the pred ominant brand used (43% of constructions). Dentists and patients were dissatisfied with 6% of the constructions. During the first 2 years, 22 of 57 constructions were complication-free. Seventeen had attachment complications and 9 had serious complications related to the abutment teeth or RPDs. A comparison between these 2 groups revealed that those with complications had every second abutment root-canal treated and a root post, while the group without complications had every fifth abutment root-canal treated. Conclusion: There were many technical and biotechnical complications and failures; the exact ratio, however, depended on the definition of complications and failure. The 2-year results also deviated considerably from the dentists’ opinions of the early results.

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog