The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

Korea Academy of Prosthodontics criteria for longevity studies of dental prostheses

보철물 수명 연구를 위한 대한치과보철학회 표준 방안: KAP Criteria

  • Yoon, Joon-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, NHIS Ilsan Hospital) ;
  • Park, Young-Bum (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Youn, Seung-Hwan (Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei Mate Dental Clinic) ;
  • Oh, Nam-Sik (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Medicine, Inha University)
  • 윤준호 (국민건강보험 일산병원 치과보철과) ;
  • 박영범 (연세대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 윤승환 (연세메이트치과 보철과) ;
  • 오남식 (인하대학교 의학전문대학원 치과 보철과)
  • Received : 2016.02.26
  • Accepted : 2016.06.07
  • Published : 2016.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The most important factor in longevity studies of dental prostheses is objective and consistent evaluation of the prosthesis. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics suggested developing a standardized method for longevity studies of dental prostheses. The purpose of this study is to evaluate previously-used criteria and to develop new criteria, in the form of a procedure flowchart and an evaluation sheet. These new criteria may be able to provide a unified standard for future longevity studies of dental prostheses. Materials and methods: A literature review was performed about the evaluation of dental prostheses. Taking into account the strengths and weaknesses of previously used criteria, a novel, intuitive and objective method was developed for assessment of dental prostheses. Then, a pilot survey was performed with the newly developed flowchart and evaluation sheet to determine problems and implement possible improvements. Results: Thirty cases of fixed dental prosthesis (FDP), 25 cases of removable dental prosthesis (RDP), and 13 cases of implant supported prosthesis (ISP) were evaluated. The average life expectancy estimate was 12.82 years for FDP, 5.96 years for RDP, and 4.82 years for ISP with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Additionally, possible improvements discovered by the pilot survey were reflected in the flowchart and evaluation sheet. Conclusion: The newly developed KAP criteria, flowchart and evaluation sheet enabled objective and consistent results in trial longevity studies of dental prostheses. It is expected that future studies will not only use the KAP criteria but also further improvement will be made on them.

목적: 보철물 수명 연구에서 가장 중요한 것은 보철물을 객관적이고 일관성 있게 평가하는 것이다. 대한치과보철학회에서는 이 필요성을 충족시키기 위해 보철물 수명연구를 위한 대한치과보철학회의 표준 방안을 마련하기로 하였다. 본 연구의 목적은 보철물 수명 연구의 통일된 표준을 마련하기 위한 보철물 평가 흐름도와 보철물 평가 기록지를 제작하는 데 있다. 재료 및 방법: 기존에 사용되었던 보철물 평가 방법을 문헌 고찰을 통해 알아본 후 직관적이며, 사용하기 쉽고, 보철물의 상태를 객관적으로 구분할 수 있는 평가 기준을 개발한다. 또한 이 기준을 시범 사용하여 문제점과 개선점을 파악한다. 결과: 고정성 보철물 30 증례, 가철성 보철물 25증례, 그리고 임플란트 보철물 13 증례로 시범 사용하여 Kaplan-Meier 생존율 분석을 시행한 결과 고정성 보철물의 평균수명 추정치는 12.82년, 가철성 보철물은 5.96년, 임플란트 보철물은 4.82년의 결과를 얻었다. 또한 조사자들에게 시범 사용 후의 문제점을 수렴하여 수정, 보완한 후 보철물 평가흐름도 및 보철물 평가 기록지를 완성하였다. 결론: 보철물 수명 평가를 위한 대한치과보철학회 표준 방안 마련을 위해 개발된 보철물 평가 흐름도와 보철물 평가 기록지를 통해 보다 객관적이고 통일된 자료 수집이 가능하였다. 향후 본 표준 방안을 이용한 보철물 수명연구가 시행될 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kwon BK, Ahn HJ, Kang JK, Kim JY, Choi JH, The jurisdictional precedent analysis of medical dispute in dental field. J Oral Med Pain 2006;31:283-96.
  2. Cha YR, Kwon JS, Choi JH, Kim JY. The analysis of the current status of medical accidents and disputes researched in the Korean web sites. J Oral Med Pain 2006;31:297-316.
  3. Schwartz NL, Whitsett LD, Berry TG, Stewart JL. Unserviceable crowns and fixed partial dentures: life-span and causes for loss of serviceability. J Am Dent Assoc 1970;81:1395-401. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1970.0398
  4. Walton JN, Gardner FM, Agar JR. A survey of crown and fixed partial denture failures: length of service and reasons for replacement. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:416-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90379-3
  5. Glantz PO, Nilner K, Jendresen MD, Sundberg H. Quality of fixed prosthodontics after 15 years. Acta Odontol Scand 1993;51:247-52. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016359309040574
  6. Glantz PO, Nilner K, Jendresen MD, Sundberg H. Quality of fixed prosthodontics after twenty-two years. Acta Odontol Scand 2002;60:213-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/000163502760147972
  7. Holm C, Tidehag P, Tillberg A, Molin M. Longevity and quality of FPDs: a retrospective study of restorations 30, 20, and 10 years after insertion. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:283-9.
  8. Hammerle CH, Ungerer MC, Fantoni PC, Bragger U, Burgin W, Lang NP. Long-term analysis of biologic and technical aspects of fixed partial dentures with cantilevers. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:409-15.
  9. Lindquist E, Karlsson S. Success rate and failures for fixed partial dentures after 20 years of service: Part I. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:133-8.
  10. Sundh B, Odman P. A study of fixed prosthodontics performed at a university clinic 18 years after insertion. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:513-9.
  11. Libby G, Arcuri MR, LaVelle WE, Hebl L. Longevity of fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:127-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70115-X
  12. Leempoel PJ, Kayser AF, Van Rossum GM, De Haan AF. The survival rate of bridges. A study of 1674 bridges in 40 Dutch general practices. J Oral Rehabil 1995;22:327-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1995.tb00780.x
  13. Palmqvist S, Swartz B. Artificial crowns and fixed partial dentures 18 to 23 years after placement. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6:279-85.
  14. Valderhaug J. A 15-year clinical evaluation of fixed prosthodontics. Acta Odontol Scand 1991;49:35-40. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016359109041138
  15. Karlsson S. A clinical evaluation of fixed bridges, 10 years following insertion. J Oral Rehabil 1986;13:423-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1986.tb01304.x
  16. Pjetursson BE, Tan K, Lang NP, Bragger U, Egger M, Zwahlen M. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:667-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01120.x
  17. Scurria MS, Bader JD, Shugars DA. Meta-analysis of fixed partial denture survival: prostheses and abutments. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:459-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70162-3
  18. Creugers NH, Kayser AF, van't Hof MA. A meta-analysis of durability data on conventional fixed bridges. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1994;22:448-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.1994.tb00795.x
  19. Shin WJ, Jeon YS, Lee KW, Lee HY, Han DH. Longevity and failure analysis of fixed restorations serviced in Korea. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2005;43:158-75.
  20. Yun MJ, Jeon YC, Jeong CM. Evaluation of clinical status of fixed prosthesis. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2009;47:99-107. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2009.47.2.99
  21. Cvar J, Ryge G. Criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. In: Documents UD ed. Printing Office, San Francisco USPHS 790244, 1971. p. 1-42.
  22. California Dental Association. Guidelines for the assessment of clinical quality and professional performance. 3rd ed. Sacramento, CA; California Dental Association, 1995.
  23. Vermeulen AH, Keltjens HM, van't Hof MA, Kayser AF. Tenyear evaluation of removable partial dentures: survival rates based on retreatment, not wearing and replacement. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:267-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90170-5

Cited by

  1. Analysis of longevity and success rate of fixed, removable, and implant prostheses treated in Korea vol.56, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2018.56.2.95
  2. 구치부 임플란트 지지 고정성 보철물의 재료에 따른 생존율, 성공률 및 합병증에 대한 후향적 연구 vol.57, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2019.57.4.342
  3. 임플란트 보철의 기능별 환자 만족도 연구 vol.42, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14347/jtd.2020.42.3.262