4.3 Article

The Influence of Age, Gender, Mandibular Bone Height, Previous Experience with Prostheses, and Fabrication Methods on Masticatory Performance of Complete Denture Wearers

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12948

关键词

Complete denture; masticatory performance; risk factors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To evaluate the influence of age, gender, mandibular bone height, previous experience with prostheses, and methods for denture fabrication on masticatory performance of complete denture (CD) wearers. Materials and Methods For this study, 29 individuals treated with CDs fabricated by simplified or conventional methods had their masticatory performance assessed 4 weeks after the prostheses' adjustment and control, using the sieve method and almonds as a natural food test. Experimental variables related to age, gender, and previous use of complete dentures were collected from dental records. Panoramic digital radiographs were used to determine mandibular bone height according to the criteria described by the American College of Prosthodontists. Data on masticatory performance were assessed using t-test for independent samples to make comparison between simplified and conventional methods, and a multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of age, gender, previous experience with CDs, and mandibular bone height on masticatory performance using SPSS software with a significance level of 5%. Results There was no significant influence regarding the method for CD fabrication (p = 0.92), age (p = 0.36), mandibular bone height (p = 0.37), and previous experience with prostheses (p = 0.15) on masticatory performance of CD wearers. Female patients presented lower masticatory performance than male (p = 0.04) patients did. Conclusions Considering the limitations of this study, it was concluded that gender might be considered a risk factor for masticatory performance of CD wearers. Female patients demonstrated reduced masticatory performance in comparison to male patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据