Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 91, Issue 4 , Page 388, April 2004

A comparison of patient's satisfaction between complete and partial removable denture wearers

J Dent 2003;31:445-51

Article Outline

 

Back to Article Outline

1. Objectives 

The aim of this study was to compare satisfaction between complete denture (CD) and Kennedy Class I removable partial denture (RPD) wearers.

Back to Article Outline

2. Materials and methods 

A total of 156 CD and 112 RPD wearers took a part in this study. From the primary group of the examined patients, only those whose RPDs and CDs were assessed as excellent or very good by the dentist took a part in this study. Patients graded satisfaction of their dentures by using an analogue scale from 1 to 5 (1=unsatisfactory; 5=excellent).

Back to Article Outline

3. Results 

Both CD and RPD wearers were mostly satisfied with their dentures (the distribution of the scores of the patients' assessments was skewed towards the highest scores; more than half of the patients scored all the examined variables to the best score category). Complete denture wearers were significantly more satisfied with chewing, speech and retention of maxillary denture than RPD wearers. Removable partial denture wearers were significantly more satisfied with the retention and comfort of wearing mandibular denture (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between CD and RPD wearers for general satisfaction with their dentures, aesthetics, and comfort of wearing maxillary denture (P>0.05; NS).

Back to Article Outline

4. Conclusions 

A majority of CD and RPD wearers were satisfied with the dentures. Complete denture wearers were more satisfied with speech, chewing, and retention of maxillary denture, while RPD wearers were more satisfied with the retention and the comfort of wearing mandibular denture. Different groups of denture wearers have to make significant but different adjustments to wear their dentures successfully.—Reprinted with permission from Elsevier, Inc.

PII: S0022-3913(04)00029-0

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.01.012

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 91, Issue 4 , Page 388, April 2004