附着固位与卡环固位可摘局部义齿:固位对患者满意度的影响。

Q1 Dentistry European Journal of Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-12-30 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1795122
Linda J Dula, Tringa Z Kelmendi, Kujtim Shala, Gloria Staka, Teuta Pustina-Krasniqi, Shera Kosumi
{"title":"附着固位与卡环固位可摘局部义齿:固位对患者满意度的影响。","authors":"Linda J Dula, Tringa Z Kelmendi, Kujtim Shala, Gloria Staka, Teuta Pustina-Krasniqi, Shera Kosumi","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1795122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong> To compare the retention and patient satisfaction of attachment-retained versus clasp-retained removable partial dentures (RPDs) over time and to evaluate the impact of retention force on patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong> This study included 107 patients with 130 RPDs at the University Dentistry Clinical Center, Prishtina, Kosovo. Patients were divided into two groups: clasp-retained RPDs (<i>n</i> = 79) and attachment-retained RPDs (<i>n</i> = 51). RPD retention forces were measured using a dynamometer, and satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire covering retention, stability, chewing ability, aesthetics, oral hygiene maintenance, speech, and pain/discomfort on a Likert scale from 1 (complete dissatisfaction) to 5 (complete satisfaction). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α. Descriptive statistics and the independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test were used for analysis, with pairwise comparisons and Spearman's rho correlation for additional insights.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Attachment-retained RPDs demonstrated superior retention, with mean scores decreasing from 5.43 to 4.40 over 3 months, compared with clasp-retained RPDs, which decreased from 4.02 to 3.23. Satisfaction scores also favored attachment-retained RPDs, dropping from 4.96 to 3.96, while clasp-retained RPDs decreased from 4.05 to 3.44. Cronbach's α indicated high reliability (α = 0.952). The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences in retention and satisfaction between the two RPD types (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). Pairwise comparisons indicated significant declines over time for both types. Spearman's rho correlation analysis revealed strong positive relationships between retention force and satisfaction scores, with correlation coefficients of 0.574 for clasp-retained and 0.522 for attachment-retained RPDs (<i>p</i> < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Attachment-retained RPDs offer higher and more stable retention and greater patient satisfaction compared with clasp-retained RPDs over the initial months of use. The significant positive correlation between retention force and patient satisfaction underscores the importance of optimizing retention in RPD design.</p>","PeriodicalId":12028,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attachment-Retained versus Clasp-Retained Removable Partial Dentures: Effects of Retention on Patient Satisfaction.\",\"authors\":\"Linda J Dula, Tringa Z Kelmendi, Kujtim Shala, Gloria Staka, Teuta Pustina-Krasniqi, Shera Kosumi\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1795122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong> To compare the retention and patient satisfaction of attachment-retained versus clasp-retained removable partial dentures (RPDs) over time and to evaluate the impact of retention force on patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong> This study included 107 patients with 130 RPDs at the University Dentistry Clinical Center, Prishtina, Kosovo. Patients were divided into two groups: clasp-retained RPDs (<i>n</i> = 79) and attachment-retained RPDs (<i>n</i> = 51). RPD retention forces were measured using a dynamometer, and satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire covering retention, stability, chewing ability, aesthetics, oral hygiene maintenance, speech, and pain/discomfort on a Likert scale from 1 (complete dissatisfaction) to 5 (complete satisfaction). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α. Descriptive statistics and the independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test were used for analysis, with pairwise comparisons and Spearman's rho correlation for additional insights.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Attachment-retained RPDs demonstrated superior retention, with mean scores decreasing from 5.43 to 4.40 over 3 months, compared with clasp-retained RPDs, which decreased from 4.02 to 3.23. Satisfaction scores also favored attachment-retained RPDs, dropping from 4.96 to 3.96, while clasp-retained RPDs decreased from 4.05 to 3.44. Cronbach's α indicated high reliability (α = 0.952). The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences in retention and satisfaction between the two RPD types (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). Pairwise comparisons indicated significant declines over time for both types. Spearman's rho correlation analysis revealed strong positive relationships between retention force and satisfaction scores, with correlation coefficients of 0.574 for clasp-retained and 0.522 for attachment-retained RPDs (<i>p</i> < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Attachment-retained RPDs offer higher and more stable retention and greater patient satisfaction compared with clasp-retained RPDs over the initial months of use. The significant positive correlation between retention force and patient satisfaction underscores the importance of optimizing retention in RPD design.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1795122\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1795122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较附着体固位与卡环固位可摘局部义齿随时间的固位和患者满意度,并评估固位力对患者满意度的影响。材料和方法:本研究纳入科索沃普里什蒂纳大学牙科临床中心107例130例rpd患者。患者分为两组,79例为卡环保留型rpd, 51例为附着保留型rpd。使用测力计测量RPD固位力,并使用问卷评估满意度,问卷内容包括固位、稳定性、咀嚼能力、美学、口腔卫生维护、言语和疼痛/不适,李克特量表从1(完全不满意)到5(完全满意)。采用Cronbach’s α评价信度。使用描述性统计和独立样本Kruskal-Wallis检验进行分析,并使用两两比较和Spearman的rho相关来获得额外的见解。结果:与卡环保留型rpd相比,附着保留型rpd在3个月内的平均评分从5.43下降到4.40,而卡环保留型rpd的平均评分从4.02下降到3.23。满意度得分也倾向于依恋保留的RPDs,从4.96下降到3.96,而扣环保留的RPDs从4.05下降到3.44。Cronbach’s α为高信度(α = 0.952)。Kruskal-Wallis测试显示两种类型的RPD在固位和满意度上有显著差异(p p结论:在使用的最初几个月里,与卡环保留的RPD相比,附着保留的RPD具有更高和更稳定的固位和更高的患者满意度。固位力与患者满意度之间的显著正相关强调了优化固位在RPD设计中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Attachment-Retained versus Clasp-Retained Removable Partial Dentures: Effects of Retention on Patient Satisfaction.

Objectives:  To compare the retention and patient satisfaction of attachment-retained versus clasp-retained removable partial dentures (RPDs) over time and to evaluate the impact of retention force on patient satisfaction.

Materials and methods:  This study included 107 patients with 130 RPDs at the University Dentistry Clinical Center, Prishtina, Kosovo. Patients were divided into two groups: clasp-retained RPDs (n = 79) and attachment-retained RPDs (n = 51). RPD retention forces were measured using a dynamometer, and satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire covering retention, stability, chewing ability, aesthetics, oral hygiene maintenance, speech, and pain/discomfort on a Likert scale from 1 (complete dissatisfaction) to 5 (complete satisfaction). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α. Descriptive statistics and the independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test were used for analysis, with pairwise comparisons and Spearman's rho correlation for additional insights.

Results:  Attachment-retained RPDs demonstrated superior retention, with mean scores decreasing from 5.43 to 4.40 over 3 months, compared with clasp-retained RPDs, which decreased from 4.02 to 3.23. Satisfaction scores also favored attachment-retained RPDs, dropping from 4.96 to 3.96, while clasp-retained RPDs decreased from 4.05 to 3.44. Cronbach's α indicated high reliability (α = 0.952). The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences in retention and satisfaction between the two RPD types (p < 0.0001). Pairwise comparisons indicated significant declines over time for both types. Spearman's rho correlation analysis revealed strong positive relationships between retention force and satisfaction scores, with correlation coefficients of 0.574 for clasp-retained and 0.522 for attachment-retained RPDs (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion:  Attachment-retained RPDs offer higher and more stable retention and greater patient satisfaction compared with clasp-retained RPDs over the initial months of use. The significant positive correlation between retention force and patient satisfaction underscores the importance of optimizing retention in RPD design.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Dentistry
European Journal of Dentistry Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
161
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Dentistry is the official journal of the Dental Investigations Society, based in Turkey. It is a double-blinded peer-reviewed, Open Access, multi-disciplinary international journal addressing various aspects of dentistry. The journal''s board consists of eminent investigators in dentistry from across the globe and presents an ideal international composition. The journal encourages its authors to submit original investigations, reviews, and reports addressing various divisions of dentistry including oral pathology, prosthodontics, endodontics, orthodontics etc. It is available both online and in print.
期刊最新文献
Finite Element Analysis of Anterior Implant-Supported Restorations with Different CAD-CAM Restorative Materials. Association of Polymorphism with Periodontitis and Salivary Levels of Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1α. The Effect of Different Chemical Surface Treatments on the Bond Strength of Resin-Matrix Ceramic Repaired with Resin Composite. A Reappraisal of the Accuracy of the Tactile Method for the Detection of the Subgingival Cementoenamel Junction: An In Vivo Study. Effect of Postrinsing Times and Methods on Surface Roughness, Hardness, and Polymerization of 3D-Printed Photopolymer Resin.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1