Introduction

Removable partial prosthodontics is a versatile, cost effective, and reversible treatment method for partially edentulous patients at any age.  With the changing trends in dental treatment that favor retention of natural teeth, a decline in the number of complete dentures with an increase in the number of removable partial dentures (RPDs) is anticipated.¹

The objectives of RPD design have been well established.  They include the restoration of function, enhancement of esthetic and, most importantly, the preservation of the remaining teeth and periodontal structures.²  The primary purpose for the classification of partially edentulous arches is to identify potential combinations of teeth to edentulous ridges in order to facilitate communications among dental colleagues, students, and technicians.  Such classification should allow longitudinal comparison of the incidence of the various classes of RPDs.  Moreover, the trends in the incidence of the various classes of RPDs being fabricated should be reviewed periodically to serve as teaching guidelines.³  A survey by Stratton and Wiebelt included three thousand partially edentulous mandibular arches and two thousand partially edentulous maxillary arches. The distribution of various Kennedy Classes of RPDs were predominated by Kennedy Class I in the mandibular arch (Figure 1) and Kennedy Class III in the maxillary arch (Figure 2).⁴

Figure 1.  A mandibular Kennedy Class 1 RPD framework.		Figure 2. A maxillary Kennedy Class 3 RPD framework.

Variations in RPD design have been demonstrated among dentists and laboratories.^5-8  Similarly, variations in teaching and practice of design concepts is also known to occur among countries as exemplified by the documented differences in the types of major connectors used in Sweden compared to North America.^9,10  A survey of the dental profession and dental laboratories in the United Kingdom has revealed that up to 60% of casts received by laboratories has little or no input from the dentists in the design of their patients’ dentures.¹²  Over the years, the concepts of RPD design have been predicated on many factors such as clinical conditions, scientific research findings, social acceptance, dogmatic traditions, and philosophical axioms.^3,10,11

The patterns of tooth loss have been evaluated in many selected populations in different countries.^13-18  The objectives of this study were to determine the patterns of partial edentulism and design frequency of cobalt chromium RPD frameworks constructed for patients who attended the clinic at the College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to establish a database for trend comparison and to what extent current design concepts are being followed.

Click Here To Navigate Within Article >> Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusions References About the Authors
	Page 2 of 14
Citation Number: Vol. 3, No. 4, Page 041