The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A clincal study of Kennedy classification and framework design of removable partial denture in Kyungpook National University hospital

경북대학교 병원에 내원한 국소의치 장착 환자의 Kennedy 분류에 따른 분포상황 및 그 설계특성에 관한 연구

  • Cha, Phill-Seon (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Jeong, In-Yeong (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Cho, Sung-Am (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University)
  • 차필선 (경북대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 정인영 (경북대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 조성암 (경북대학교 치의학전문대학원 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2010.04.02
  • Accepted : 2010.06.29
  • Published : 2010.07.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study was aimed to investigate the frequency of different classes of partial edentulism and the most frequently used design components of conventional removable partial dentures. Materials and methods: 63 patients who were treated with removable partial denture in Kyungpook National University hospital for 2003-2006 were selected. A total of 76 removable partial denture frameworks were investigated. Kennedy classification was used to identify the class of partial edentulism. Results: Results indicated that Kennedy class I removable partial dentures were the most frequently constructed. Most patients' cases were designed without modification areas. Conclusion: The most common type of direct retainer were the RPI clasp and RPA clasp in both maxilla and mandible. Lingual bar, linguoplate and anterior posterior palatal straps were the more frequently used mandibular and maxillary major connectors respectively. We did not have any case about Kennedy class IV patients.

연구 목적: 본 연구의 목적은 경북대학교 치과병원 보철과에서 치료받은 환자들의 부분 무치악의 패턴과 가철성 국소의치의 framework 디자인의 빈도를 조사하는 것이다. 연구 재료 및 방법:경북대학교 치과병원 보철과에서 2003-2006년 사이에 수련의가 진료한 63명의 환자들을 대상으로 조사하였다. 각각의 부분 무치악은 Applegate가 주장한 지침을 포함한 Kennedy 분류로 기록되었고 Kennedy 분류에서 추가결손부 (modification area)는 5그룹으로 다시 나누었다. 결과:Kennedy 분류에 따라 Class I이 63.63%로 가장 많이 설계되었으며 상, 하악 모두 치아지지 국소의치보다 후방 연장 국소의치가 더 많았다. 또한, 추가결손부가 없는 가철성 국소의치가 83.33%로 가장 많았다. 주연결자의 분포로는 상악에서 전후방 구개 스트랩이 67.57%로 가장 많았고 하악에서는 설측바가 71.79%로 가장 많았다. 사용된 직접 유지장치들 중 73.91%가 RPI 또는 RPA 였고 간접 유지장치는 교합면 레스트와 견치 레스트가 93.83%로 대다수를 차지하였다. 결론: Kennedy Class I 가철성 국소의치가 가장 흔하게 사용되었고 대부분 추가 결손부가 없는 국소의치로 디자인 되었다. 상악에서는 전후방 구개 스트랩, 하악에서는 설측 바와 설측판이 가장 흔하게 사용되었고 직접 유지장치로는 RPI와RPA가 가장 흔하게 사용되었으며 간접 유지장치는 교합면 레스트와 설면 레스트가 주로 사용되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Phoenix RD, Cagna DR, Defreest CF. Clinical removable partial prosthodontics. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc; 2004.
  2. Carr AB, McGivney GP, Brown DT. McCraken's removable partial prosthodontics. Mosby, Inc; 2005.
  3. Harvey WL, Hoffman W Jr. Ten-year study of trends in removable prosthodontic service. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:644-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90583-0
  4. Sykora O, Calikkocaoglu S. Maxillary removable partial denture designs by commercial dental laboratories. J Prosthet Dent 1970;23:633-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(70)90226-X
  5. Frantz WR. Variability in dentists'designs of a removable maxillary partial denture. J Prosthet Dent 1973;29:172-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(73)90110-8
  6. Frantz WR. Variations in a removable maxillary partial denture design by dentists. J Prosthet Dent 1975;34:625-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(75)90059-1
  7. Applegate OC. The rationale of partial denture choice. J Prosthet Dent 1960;10:891-907. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(60)90123-2
  8. Sadig WM, Idowu AT. Removable partial denture design: a study of a selected population in Saudi Arabia. J Contemp Dent Pract 2002;3:40-53.
  9. National Institute of Dental Research. Oral health of United States adults: the National Survey of Oral Health in U.S. Employed Adults and Seniors, 1985-1986: national findings. Bethesda, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 1987:3-31; NIH publication no. 87-2868.
  10. Al-Omiri MK, Karasneh JA, Lynch E, Lamey PJ, Clifford TJ. Impacts of missing upper anterior teeth on daily living. Int Dent J 2009;59:127-32.
  11. Levin L. Dealing with dental implant failures. J Appl Oral Sci 2008;16:171-5. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572008000300002
  12. Inukai M, Baba K, John MT, Igarashi Y. Does removable partial denture quality affect individuals'oral health? J Dent Res 2008;87:736-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910808700816
  13. Witter DJ, van Palenstein Helderman WH, Creugers NH, Kayser AF. The shortened dental arch concept and its implications for oral health care. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1999;27:249-58.
  14. Armellini DB, Heydecke G, Witter DJ, Creugers NH. Effect of removable partial dentures on oral health-related quality of life in subjects with shortened dental arches: a 2-center cross-sectional study. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:524-30.
  15. Pellizzer EP, Verri FR, Falcon-Antenucci RM, Goiato MC, Gennari Filho H. Evaluation of different retention systems on a distal extension removable partial denture associated with an osseointegrated implant. J Craniofac Surg 2010;21:727-34. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181d8098a
  16. Jones JD, Turkyilmaz I, Garcia LT. Removable partial dentures--treatment now and for the future. Tex Dent J 2010;127:365-72.
  17. Abbo B. Tooth-implant borne RPD: A case report. Dent Today 2010;29:118, 120, 122.
  18. Ohkubo C, Kobayashi M, Suzuki Y, Hosoi T. Effect of implant support on distal-extension removable partial dentures: in vivo assessment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:1095-101.
  19. Ohkubo C, Kurihara D, Shimpo H, Suzuki Y, Kokubo Y, Hosoi T. Effect of implant support on distal extension removable partial dentures: in vitro assessment. J Oral Rehabil 2007;34:52-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01641.x
  20. Uludag B, Celik G. Technical tips for improved retention and stabilization of a unilateral removable partial denture. J Oral Implantol 2007;33:344-6. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2007)33[344:TTFIRA]2.0.CO;2
  21. Mijiritsky E, Ormianer Z, Klinger A, Mardinger O. Use of dental implants to improve unfavorable removable partial denture design. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005;26:744-6, 748, 750.
  22. Kuzmanovic DV, Payne AG, Purton DG. Distal implants to modify the Kennedy classification of a removable partial denture: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:8-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.04.010
  23. Al-Johany SS, Andres C. ICK classification system for partially edentulous arches. J Prosthodont 2008;17:502-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00328.x
  24. Basker RM, Harrison A, Davenport JC, Marshall JL. Partial denture design in general dental practice-10 years on. Br Dent J 1988;165:245-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4806577
  25. Becker CM, Kaiser DA, Goldfogel MH. Evolution of removable partial denture design. J Prosthodont 1994;3:158-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1994.tb00147.x
  26. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90016-4