File Download
 
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
 
Supplementary

Article: A retrospective clinical evaluation of two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleA retrospective clinical evaluation of two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures
 
AuthorsBotelho, MG1
Leung, KCM1
Ng, H
Chan, K
 
Issue Date2006
 
PublisherAmerican Dental Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://jada.ada.org
 
CitationJournal Of The American Dental Association, 2006, v. 137 n. 6, p. 783-788 [How to Cite?]
 
AbstractBackground. The authors conducted a study to examine the clinical performance of two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures (RBFPDs) that were inserted at The Prince Philip Dental Hospital, University of Hong Kong. Methods. The authors recalled patients who had received two-unit cantilevered RBFPDs at least 24 months before the recall examination. The authors recorded the following data: patient's sex and age, operator's experience, prosthesis cementation date, endodontic treatment if performed, bone support, tooth mobility, the presence of shim-stock contacts on the abutment or pontic in intercuspal position, and the presence of aproximal axial contacts adjacent to the prosthesis. They also recorded the date of any debonding with subsequent treatment. They asked the patients qualitative questions about their prostheses. Results. A total of 269 prostheses were placed in 214 patients and had a mean service life of 51.7 months ± 19.5 months standard deviation, with a range of 13.2 to 141.6 months. Of 14 failed prostheses, 12 debonded, resulting in a success rate of 94.8 percent and clinical retention rate of 95.5 percent. No discernable rotation or drifting of the abutments was apparent in any of the prostheses. Overall patient satisfaction with RBFPDs was good, with an average assessment score of 8.5. Conclusions. The authors observed a 95.5 percent clinical retention rate of 269 two-unit RBFPDs, with no apparent drifting of the abutments. Longer-term follow-up studies are required. Clinical Implications. Two-unit RBFPDs are conservative and clinically retentive prostheses in the short to medium term.
 
ISSN0002-8177
2013 Impact Factor: 2.238
 
ISI Accession Number IDWOS:000238329600019
 
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
 
DC FieldValue
dc.contributor.authorBotelho, MG
 
dc.contributor.authorLeung, KCM
 
dc.contributor.authorNg, H
 
dc.contributor.authorChan, K
 
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T05:50:23Z
 
dc.date.available2010-09-06T05:50:23Z
 
dc.date.issued2006
 
dc.description.abstractBackground. The authors conducted a study to examine the clinical performance of two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures (RBFPDs) that were inserted at The Prince Philip Dental Hospital, University of Hong Kong. Methods. The authors recalled patients who had received two-unit cantilevered RBFPDs at least 24 months before the recall examination. The authors recorded the following data: patient's sex and age, operator's experience, prosthesis cementation date, endodontic treatment if performed, bone support, tooth mobility, the presence of shim-stock contacts on the abutment or pontic in intercuspal position, and the presence of aproximal axial contacts adjacent to the prosthesis. They also recorded the date of any debonding with subsequent treatment. They asked the patients qualitative questions about their prostheses. Results. A total of 269 prostheses were placed in 214 patients and had a mean service life of 51.7 months ± 19.5 months standard deviation, with a range of 13.2 to 141.6 months. Of 14 failed prostheses, 12 debonded, resulting in a success rate of 94.8 percent and clinical retention rate of 95.5 percent. No discernable rotation or drifting of the abutments was apparent in any of the prostheses. Overall patient satisfaction with RBFPDs was good, with an average assessment score of 8.5. Conclusions. The authors observed a 95.5 percent clinical retention rate of 269 two-unit RBFPDs, with no apparent drifting of the abutments. Longer-term follow-up studies are required. Clinical Implications. Two-unit RBFPDs are conservative and clinically retentive prostheses in the short to medium term.
 
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
 
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of The American Dental Association, 2006, v. 137 n. 6, p. 783-788 [How to Cite?]
 
dc.identifier.epage788
 
dc.identifier.hkuros120019
 
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000238329600019
 
dc.identifier.issn0002-8177
2013 Impact Factor: 2.238
 
dc.identifier.issue6
 
dc.identifier.openurl
 
dc.identifier.pmid16803807
 
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33745755642
 
dc.identifier.spage783
 
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/66912
 
dc.identifier.volume137
 
dc.languageeng
 
dc.publisherAmerican Dental Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://jada.ada.org
 
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
 
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of the American Dental Association
 
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
 
dc.subject.meshAdolescent
 
dc.subject.meshAdult
 
dc.subject.meshAged
 
dc.subject.meshAged, 80 and over
 
dc.subject.meshAlveolar Bone Loss - classification
 
dc.subject.meshCementation
 
dc.subject.meshDental Abutments
 
dc.subject.meshDental Restoration Failure
 
dc.subject.meshDenture Design
 
dc.subject.meshDenture Retention
 
dc.subject.meshDenture, Partial, Fixed, Resin-Bonded
 
dc.subject.meshFemale
 
dc.subject.meshFollow-Up Studies
 
dc.subject.meshHumans
 
dc.subject.meshMale
 
dc.subject.meshMiddle Aged
 
dc.subject.meshPatient Satisfaction
 
dc.subject.meshPhosphates
 
dc.subject.meshResin Cements
 
dc.subject.meshRetrospective Studies
 
dc.subject.meshRoot Canal Therapy
 
dc.subject.meshTooth Mobility - classification
 
dc.subject.meshTooth Preparation, Prosthodontic
 
dc.titleA retrospective clinical evaluation of two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures
 
dc.typeArticle
 
<?xml encoding="utf-8" version="1.0"?>
<item><contributor.author>Botelho, MG</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Leung, KCM</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Ng, H</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Chan, K</contributor.author>
<date.accessioned>2010-09-06T05:50:23Z</date.accessioned>
<date.available>2010-09-06T05:50:23Z</date.available>
<date.issued>2006</date.issued>
<identifier.citation>Journal Of The American Dental Association, 2006, v. 137 n. 6, p. 783-788</identifier.citation>
<identifier.issn>0002-8177</identifier.issn>
<identifier.uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10722/66912</identifier.uri>
<description.abstract>Background. The authors conducted a study to examine the clinical performance of two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures (RBFPDs) that were inserted at The Prince Philip Dental Hospital, University of Hong Kong. Methods. The authors recalled patients who had received two-unit cantilevered RBFPDs at least 24 months before the recall examination. The authors recorded the following data: patient&apos;s sex and age, operator&apos;s experience, prosthesis cementation date, endodontic treatment if performed, bone support, tooth mobility, the presence of shim-stock contacts on the abutment or pontic in intercuspal position, and the presence of aproximal axial contacts adjacent to the prosthesis. They also recorded the date of any debonding with subsequent treatment. They asked the patients qualitative questions about their prostheses. Results. A total of 269 prostheses were placed in 214 patients and had a mean service life of 51.7 months &#177; 19.5 months standard deviation, with a range of 13.2 to 141.6 months. Of 14 failed prostheses, 12 debonded, resulting in a success rate of 94.8 percent and clinical retention rate of 95.5 percent. No discernable rotation or drifting of the abutments was apparent in any of the prostheses. Overall patient satisfaction with RBFPDs was good, with an average assessment score of 8.5. Conclusions. The authors observed a 95.5 percent clinical retention rate of 269 two-unit RBFPDs, with no apparent drifting of the abutments. Longer-term follow-up studies are required. Clinical Implications. Two-unit RBFPDs are conservative and clinically retentive prostheses in the short to medium term.</description.abstract>
<language>eng</language>
<publisher>American Dental Association. The Journal&apos;s web site is located at http://jada.ada.org</publisher>
<relation.ispartof>Journal of the American Dental Association</relation.ispartof>
<subject.mesh>Adolescent</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Adult</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Aged</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Aged, 80 and over</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Alveolar Bone Loss - classification</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Cementation</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Dental Abutments</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Dental Restoration Failure</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Denture Design</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Denture Retention</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Denture, Partial, Fixed, Resin-Bonded</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Female</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Follow-Up Studies</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Humans</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Male</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Middle Aged</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Patient Satisfaction</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Phosphates</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Resin Cements</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Retrospective Studies</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Root Canal Therapy</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Tooth Mobility - classification</subject.mesh>
<subject.mesh>Tooth Preparation, Prosthodontic</subject.mesh>
<title>A retrospective clinical evaluation of two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures</title>
<type>Article</type>
<identifier.openurl>http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&amp;issn=0002-8177&amp;volume=137&amp;issue=6&amp;spage=783&amp;epage=788&amp;date=2006&amp;atitle=A+retrospective+clinical+evaluation+of+two-unit+cantilevered+resin-bonded+fixed+partial+dentures</identifier.openurl>
<description.nature>Link_to_subscribed_fulltext</description.nature>
<identifier.pmid>16803807</identifier.pmid>
<identifier.scopus>eid_2-s2.0-33745755642</identifier.scopus>
<identifier.hkuros>120019</identifier.hkuros>
<relation.references>http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33745755642&amp;selection=ref&amp;src=s&amp;origin=recordpage</relation.references>
<identifier.volume>137</identifier.volume>
<identifier.issue>6</identifier.issue>
<identifier.spage>783</identifier.spage>
<identifier.epage>788</identifier.epage>
<identifier.isi>WOS:000238329600019</identifier.isi>
<publisher.place>United States</publisher.place>
</item>
Author Affiliations
  1. Prince Philip Dental Hospital