1
|
Sonnahalli NK, Mishra SK, Chowdhary R. Attitude of dental professionals toward cast partial denture: A questionnaire survey in India. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2020; 20:104-109. [PMID: 32089606 PMCID: PMC7008619 DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_304_19] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2019] [Revised: 11/07/2019] [Accepted: 12/27/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Aims: The use of cast partial dentures (CPDs) has been decreased and its importance has been declined in the teaching curriculum. The purpose of this survey was to evaluate the attitudes of dental professionals toward conditions using CPDs in private practice in India. Settings and Design: Descriptive survey Materials and Methods: This survey consists of eight close-ended questions concerning the use of CPD by dental professionals practicing in India. The URLs of the questionnaire were shared via E-mail to dentists practicing throughout India, to obtain a response of 384 which is a predetermined sample size. Statistical Analysis Used: Statistical analysis was done using counts and percentages and the results were further analyzed statistically by the Chi-square test. Results: Nearly 42.79% of general dental practitioners (GDPs), 47.26% of prosthodontists, and 9.95% of other specialist dentists responded to the questionnaire. GDPs mostly preferred removable partial dentures (RPDs) (71.87%) and fixed partial dentures (57.22%), whereas prosthodontists preferred mostly implant (60.91%). GDPs mostly preferred flexible dentures (62.42%), whereas prosthodontists preferred CPDs 62.84%. Almost 52.50% of the GDPs mostly raised a cost issue and 63.11% of the prosthodontists had difficulty in adjustment with CPDs. Nearly 63.46% of the dentists told that implant-supported restorations are better options compared to CPDs; still, majority of the dentists (53.23%) were in favor that more importance for teaching CPDs in graduation curriculum should be given. Conclusions: This survey shows that in India a significant proportion of GDPs (71.87%) preferred RPDs, mostly flexible dentures (62.42%) due to their low cost compared to CPDs. Prosthodontists mostly preferred implants (60.91%) because they are more confident and better trained in these. It is recommended that more importance be given in teaching implants along with CPDs in graduation curriculum so that practitioners can better educate their patients about implants and their advantages over flexible dentures and their utilization in cases where patients are not willing for CPDs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nithin Kumar Sonnahalli
- Department of Prosthodontics, Rajarajeswari Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
| | - Sunil Kumar Mishra
- Department of Prosthodontics, People's College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India
| | - Ramesh Chowdhary
- Department of Prosthodontics, Rajarajeswari Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMDO, Borges ALS, Araújo RM, da Silva JMF, Bottino MA, Kleverlaan CJ, de Jager N. Effect of different materials and undercut on the removal force and stress distribution in circumferential clasps during direct retainer action in removable partial dentures. Dent Mater 2019; 36:179-186. [PMID: 31791736 DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2019.11.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2019] [Revised: 10/22/2019] [Accepted: 11/15/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different materials and undercut on the removal force and stress distribution in the supporting tooth and in the circumferential clasp used in removable partial prosthesis. METHODS Upper molars prepared for Akers circumferential clasp with retention and opposing arm were modeled, scanned, elaborated with CAD software and the geometries imported in FEA and analyzed. Six different materials were selected for the clasp (Polyamide, Polyoxymethylene, Polyetheretherketone - PEEK, Gold alloy, Titanium and CoCr) and 3 different undercuts (0.25, 0.50 and 0.75mm), totaling 18 groups. RESULTS The clasps presented greater stress in their structure and potentially greater damage to the dental enamel when made with rigid materials and with more undercut; however, they presented greater ability to remain in position. SIGNIFICANCE Polyamide with a higher undercut is an esthetic alternative to rigid metallic clasps. It showed promising behavior because it strongly reduces the damage to the enamel, and even with an undercut of 0.75, the retention is lower than for CoCr with a 0.25 undercut, and this retention might still be sufficient. Polyoxymethylene and Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) are not suitable materials for the clasps, because the maximum stress occurring during removal with higher undercuts is higher than the material strength.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- João Paulo Mendes Tribst
- PhD Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Institute of Science and Technology, Av. Eng. Francisco José Longo, nº 777. Jardim São Dimas, 12245-000, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil; Department of Dental Materials Science, Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Universiteit van Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit, Gustav Mahlerlaan #3004, 1081 LA, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands.
| | - Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva
- PhD Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Institute of Science and Technology, Av. Eng. Francisco José Longo, nº 777. Jardim São Dimas, 12245-000, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil; Department of Dental Materials Science, Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Universiteit van Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit, Gustav Mahlerlaan #3004, 1081 LA, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands.
| | - Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges
- PhD Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Institute of Science and Technology, Av. Eng. Francisco José Longo, nº 777. Jardim São Dimas, 12245-000, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.
| | - Rodrigo Máximo Araújo
- PhD Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Institute of Science and Technology, Av. Eng. Francisco José Longo, nº 777. Jardim São Dimas, 12245-000, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.
| | - João Maurício Ferraz da Silva
- PhD Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Institute of Science and Technology, Av. Eng. Francisco José Longo, nº 777. Jardim São Dimas, 12245-000, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.
| | - Marco Antonio Bottino
- PhD Graduate Program in Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Institute of Science and Technology, Av. Eng. Francisco José Longo, nº 777. Jardim São Dimas, 12245-000, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.
| | - Cornelis Johannes Kleverlaan
- Department of Dental Materials Science, Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Universiteit van Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit, Gustav Mahlerlaan #3004, 1081 LA, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands.
| | - Niek de Jager
- Department of Dental Materials Science, Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Universiteit van Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit, Gustav Mahlerlaan #3004, 1081 LA, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|