Factors associated with mucosal pain in patients with partial removable dental prostheses

Kumagai, Hiroshi; Fueki, Kenji; Yoshida‐Kohno, Eiko; Wakabayashi, Noriyuki

doi:10.1111/joor.12417

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the factors included in our SEM, the direct effect of oral dryness on the CA score was the greatest, which is in line with previous findings . In addition, oral dryness was also previously identified as a risk factor for mucosal pain . Therefore, from a clinical perspective, both mucosal pain and oral dryness should be considered in treatment with PRDPs.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Mucosal pain is one of the most common complaints in patients with removable dental prostheses (RDPs) . In cross‐sectional studies, 20%‐50% of patients with RDPs experienced mucosal pain when using dentures . Mucosal pain is noxious stimulation of the denture bearing mucosa while occluding and chewing with dentures; thus, mucosal pain could be a cause of masticatory function impairment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The association between mucosal pain and subjective masticatory function in patients with partial removable dental prostheses

Fueki

Yoshida‐Kohno

Inamochi

et al. 2019

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Improvement of masticatory function is critical in prosthetic treatment. Multiple factors are related to patients' perception of chewing ability in denture wearers. However, the associations between such factors and chewing ability have not yet been fully elucidated. Objective To investigate the association between mucosal pain and subjective masticatory function in patients with partial removable dental prostheses (PRDPs). Methods This cross‐sectional study included 333 consecutive patients with PRDPs (mean age 71.2 years, male 33.3%) who were recruited from the prosthetic clinic of a dental hospital in Japan. Patients' perception of chewing ability was evaluated using a food intake questionnaire consisting of 20 items, and chewing difficulty was rated by patients using an 11‐point numerical scale. Participants rated the pain intensity of the denture‐supporting mucosa and oral dryness while chewing. In addition, the bilateral maximal biting force (MBF) was recorded. A structural equation model was used to identify the factors associated with chewing ability and chewing difficulty. Results The model indicated that mucosal pain, oral dryness, the number of occluding pairs, the denture type (interim/definitive PRDPs) and the MBF were significant independent predictors of chewing ability and chewing difficulty (P < 0.01). Conclusions Our findings suggest that mucosal pain is a risk factor for impairment of subjective masticatory function in patients with PRDPs. It is clinically important to consider the denture design and to select denture base materials with regard to the prevention of mucosal pain.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The association between mucosal pain and subjective masticatory function in patients with partial removable dental prostheses

Fueki

Yoshida‐Kohno

Inamochi

et al. 2019

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They found that this group presented significantly more masseter muscle EMG activity that the control group (i.e., denture wearers without pain) during rest, and suggested that identifying AB is of great importance for the success of subsequent treatment of denture wearers. 27 Similarly, Kumagai et al 28 showed that AB, as well as other factors (such as age, number of missing teeth, mucosal condition, mucosal damage, bone prominence), is an independent predictor of intensity and frequency of mucosal pain in the denture-bearing area of patients with partial removable dental prostheses. It would be of interest to investigate whether AB is related to mucosal pain in implant-supported RP wearers, and if so, if this mechanism can be used in treatment planning following the aversive conditioning paradigm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Experience with bruxism in the everyday oral implantology practice in the Netherlands: a qualitative study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo explore how bruxism is dealt with by accredited oral implantologists within daily clinical practice.Materials and methodsNine semi-structured interviews of oral implantologists practicing in non-academic clinical practices in the Netherlands were performed, and thematic analysis was conducted using a framework-based approach.ResultsOral implant treatments in bruxing patients were a generally well-accepted practice. Complications were often expected, with most being of minor impact. Contradictive attitudes emerged on the topic of bruxism being an etiologic factor for peri-implant bone loss and loss of osseointegration. Views on the ideal treatment plan varied, though the importance of the superstructure’s occlusion and articulation features was repeatedly pointed at. Similarly, views on protective splints varied, regarding their necessity and material choice. Bruxism was diagnosed mainly by clinical examination, alongside with patient anamnesis and clinician’s intuition. There was little attention for awake bruxism.DiscussionBruxism was generally not considered a contraindication for implantological treatments by accredited oral implantologists. Views on the interaction between bruxism and bone loss/loss of osseointegration varied, as did views on the ideal treatment plan.ConclusionsThere is a need for better understanding of the extent to which, and under which circumstances, sleep and/or awake bruxism can be seen as causal factors for the occurrence of oral implant complications.

show abstract

“…Denture sores were another major source of maintenance needs in the present investigation. Studies have shown that interim dentures are associated with increased mucosal pain and, accordingly, with reduced chewing ability [18,19]. An effort should therefore be made to achieve secure and pain-free seating of the denture so that good masticatory function will be ensured.…”

Section: Oral-health Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral-health implications and maintenance needs of Removable Partial Dentures (RPDs) worn during pre-prosthetic treatment

Winter¹,

Kochel²,

Szep³

et al. 2019

J Dent Probl Solut

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients undergoing a variety of pre-prosthetic treatment regimens are commonly provided with a removable partial denture (RPD) to preserve or restore function and esthetics during this interim period. The service duration of such an interim RPD is usually limited by its inexpensive fabrication, and prolonged coverage of the abutment teeth by the denture base and clasp structures can give rise to periodontal and carious lesions. We therefore conducted a study to analyze the oral-health implications and maintenance requirements based on clinical documentation available for 575 interim RPDs covering a mean observation period of 31.21±22.02 (3−158) months. The total success rate of these RPDs was 60.7% and signifi cantly higher for the mandibular (65.9%) than the maxillary (56.0%) dentures (p=0.014). They were associated with a signifi cantly increased risk of carious decay (p<0.05) and actual loss (p<0.05) of abutment teeth. In one-quarter of cases (24.9%), they involved increases in tooth mobility. Patient compliance with the prescribed recall schedule yielded a signifi cantly higher success rate than noncompliance (p=0.023). Clasp and resin fractures were frequent causes of repair, and repair needs increased with the duration of intraoral service. Based on our fi ndings, we recommend the use of an interim RPD for 3 to 6 months of intraoral service, which is appropriate for many pretreatment regimens. We do not recommend uses for longer than 9 months, considering that one-third of the RPDs in our study had already been repaired by that time. To minimize periodontal and carious lesions, it is advisable to take advantage of periodic recalls, which should include meeting any relining needs and checking for pressure sores to ensure good seating of the RPD. Whenever a need for repair arises, an appropriate material should be selected to avoid the development of denture stomatitis.

show abstract

Factors associated with mucosal pain in patients with partial removable dental prostheses

Cited by 11 publications

References 24 publications

The association between mucosal pain and subjective masticatory function in patients with partial removable dental prostheses

The association between mucosal pain and subjective masticatory function in patients with partial removable dental prostheses

Experience with bruxism in the everyday oral implantology practice in the Netherlands: a qualitative study

Oral-health implications and maintenance needs of Removable Partial Dentures (RPDs) worn during pre-prosthetic treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About