Patient satisfaction toward aesthetic and functional outcomes: a comparative study of acrylic vs. cobalt-chrome removable partial dentures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31436/ijohs.v6i1.317Keywords:
acrylic RPD, aesthetics, cobalt-chrome RPD, functions, patient satisfactionAbstract
Removable partial dentures (RPD) are effective prostheses for restoring both function and aesthetics following tooth loss. Patient satisfaction with RPD functional and aesthetic outcomes is critical in determining the success of RPD therapy. This study aimed to evaluate and compare patient satisfaction with the function and aesthetics of acrylic and cobalt chrome (Co-Cr) RPD and identify factors affecting patients' satisfaction with RPD. Ninety-one patients who received RPD from undergraduate dental students from Kulliyyah of Dentistry (KOD), IIUM, participated in this study. The number of RPD issued for these patients was 150 units, with 121 (80.7%) acrylic and 29 (19.3%) Co-Cr RPD. Patients completed validated questionnaires consisting of four sections: demographics information, patient satisfaction towards the function of RPD, patient satisfaction towards aesthetics of RPD and patient perception towards retention and stability of RPD. Data analysis was conducted using Microsoft Excel 2016 and SPSS version 25. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyse and compare patient satisfaction levels of RPD. A chi-square test was used to examine patients’ perceptions of retention and stability of their RPD. Analysis was set as p<0.05 with a 95% confidence interval as statistically significant. The majority of patients reported greater functional and aesthetic satisfaction with acrylic removable partial dentures (RPDs) compared to cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) RPDs. There was no significant relationship between patient satisfaction with retention and stability of RPD. In conclusion, acrylic RPDs were perceived to be superior to Co-Cr RPDs, and patient satisfaction was not influenced by the retention or stability of the RPDs.
References
Almufleh, B. S. (2020). Patient-reported Outcomes of Removable Partial Denture Treatment. Canada: McGill University.
Awawdeh, M., Alotaibi, M.B., Alharbi, A.H., Alnafisah, S.A., Alasiri, T.S., Alrashidi, N.I et al. (2024). A systematic review of patient satisfaction with Removable Partial Dentures (RPDs). Cureus, 16(1): e51793. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.51793
Awan, M.R., Asghar, H., Ullah, A. (2018). Acrylic partial denture versus chromium cobalt denture: a study, gauging the patient satisfaction for what is best and most suitable in a defined local population. Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences, 12(1), 246-249.
Bessadet, M., Nicolas, E., Sochat, M., Hennequin, M., Veyrune, J. L. (2013). Impact of removable partial denture prosthesis on chewing efficiency. Journal of Applied Oral Science: Revista FOB, 21(5), 392-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-775720130046
Bosînceanu, D. G., Sandu, I., Baciu, E. R., Bosînceanu, D. N., Surlari, Z., Mâr?u, I., Balco?, C., & Bolat, M. (2019). Flexible acrylate dentures versus chromium cobalt removable partial dentures - a viable therapeutical solution. Materiale Plastice, 56 (1), 120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37358/MP.19.1.5135
Campbell, S. D., Cooper, L. F., Craddock, H. L., Hyde, T. P., Nattress, B., Pavitt, S., & Seymour, D. (2017). Removable partial dentures: The clinical need for innovation. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 118(3), 273. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.01.008
Carr, A. B., & Brown, D. T. (2010). McCracken's removable partial prosthodontics-e-book. United Sate: Elsevier Health Sciences.
?elebi?, A., & Knezovi?-Zlatari?, D. (2003). A comparison of patient’s satisfaction between complete and partial removable denture wearers. Journal of Dentistry, 31(7), 445. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(03)00094-0
Cortés-Sandoval, G., Martínez-Castañón, G. A., Patiño?Marín, N., Martínez-Rodríguez, P. R., & Loyola-Rodríguez, J. P. (2015). Surface roughness and hardness evaluation of some base metal alloys and denture base acrylics used for oral rehabilitation. Materials Letters, 144, 100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2015.01.035
Hamze, R., Idris, M., Muthiah Ravinson, D. S., Jung, M. C., Haiges, R., Djurovich, P. I., & Thompson, M. E. (2020). Highly efficient deep blue luminescence of 2-coordinate coinage metal complexes bearing bulky NHC benzimidazolyl carbene. Frontiers in Chemistry, 8, 401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2020.00401
Koyama, S., Sasaki, K., Yokoyama, M., Sasaki, T., & Hanawa, S. (2010). Evaluation of factors affecting the continuing use and patient satisfaction with removable partial dentures over 5 years. Journal of Prosthodontic Research, 54(2), 97-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2009.11.007
Nejatian, T., Pezeshki, S., & Syed, A. U. Y. (2023). Acrylic denture base materials. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780081024768000050
Shala, K., Dula, L., Pustina-Krasniqi, T., Bicaj, T., Ahmedi, E., Lila-Krasniqi, Z., & Tmava-Dragusha, A. (2016). Patient’s Satisfaction with Removable Partial Dentures: A Retrospective Case Series. The Open Dentistry Journal,10(1), 656. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601610010656
Sharma, A., Tabassum, A., (2018). Evaluation of patient satisfaction for retention, masticatory efficacy, aesthetics and comfort for removable partial denture: A retrospective study. International Journal of Applied Dental Sciences, 4(1), 91-93.
Takaichi, A., Fueki, K., Murakami, N., Ueno, T., Inamochi, Y., Wada, et al. (2022). A systematic review of digital removable partial dentures. Part II: CAD/CAM framework, artificial teeth, and denture base. Journal of Prosthodontic Research, 66(1), 53-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_20_00117
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
