1967
DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(67)90053-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Removable partial denture design: A review and a challenge

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1973
1973
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some of the potential disadvantages of RPD treatment are the risk of developing caries, periodontal involvement of the abutment teeth, continuous ridge resorption, and unesthetic appearance of the clasps 1–6 . Numerous articles have been written on RPD design, ultimately guiding clinicians to construct simple and functional prostheses 7–13 …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of the potential disadvantages of RPD treatment are the risk of developing caries, periodontal involvement of the abutment teeth, continuous ridge resorption, and unesthetic appearance of the clasps 1–6 . Numerous articles have been written on RPD design, ultimately guiding clinicians to construct simple and functional prostheses 7–13 …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…THE MAJOR connector of a removable partial denture (RPD) plays a critical role in transmitting applied occlusal forces from artificial teeth to all the supporting structures. The connector must be rigid if it is to be successful in transmitting lateral forces to the RPD abutments on the other side of the dental arch 1–3 . Some clinical studies indicate that there is no adverse effect on the abutment teeth if RPDs include rigid major connectors and the other essential requirements in their design and are maintained with a comprehensive recall program 4,5 …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The connector must be rigid if it is to be successful 1 in transmitting lateral forces to the RPD abutments on the other side of the dental arch. [1][2][3] Some clinical studies indicate that there is no adverse effect on the abutment teeth if RPDs include rigid major connectors and the other essential requirements in their design and are maintained with a comprehensive recall program. 4,5 The rigidity of an RPD framework is influenced by its width, thickness, design of the connector, 6,7 curvature of the ridge arc span, 7,8 and the elastic modulus of the alloy used in the framework.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The U-shape is indicated for use in cases with an inoperable palatal torus, Kennedy class III with multiple modifications [31,8], Kennedy class IV rotational-path RPDs [32,33], and in cases with an overstated gag reflex and unable to accepta bar or strap crossing their posterior palate. Although often used arbitrarily, the U-shape major connector should not be the design of first choice, because other connectors may serve more effectively [29,31,34].…”
Section: U-shapementioning
confidence: 99%