PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Denture Precision Attachment”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 325 records · Page 18Linked to original sources
PubMed1992

Bar attachments for overdentures with nonparallel abutments.

Bar attachments are easily fabricated and provide increased retention and support for overdentures. Nonparallel root abutments can preclude the routine use of bar attachments unless modifications are made in the design. This article reviews several existing techniques to successfully fabricate bar attachments in overdenture patients with nonparallel abutments. In addition, three alternative methods are presented for placing bar attachments on abutments with divergent roots.

Dental Abutments↗
PubMed1997

[Fabrication and use of two kinds of overdenture attachments].

The authors introduced the fabrication of stud attachment and bar attachment used to increase the stability and retention of overdenture. During two years' periods, the results of the clinical practice indicated: the retention of overdenture was increased and patients' masticator function was improved when attachments were used, and then the fabrications of two kinds of attachments were simple and value of attachments is cheap. The technique was popularized and used easily.

Denture Precision Attachment↗
PubMed1977

Attachment fixation for overdentures. Part I.

Scientific evidence of both constructive and destructive movements of teeth has influenced the design and selection of attachments for overdentures. Dowel designs that would be acceptable for normal copings must be reconsidered in view of the mechanical effectiveness of parallel-walled dowels and screws. Coping designs for attachment overdentures must provide retention, resistance to rotation, and bulk when joined with the dowel and attachment, without negating the advantage of the reduced crown-root ratio. Splinting with a bar-type attachment (1) has advantages over splinting with a stud-type attachment that outweigh the disadvantages of bulk and (2) provides ease of replacement when one of several remaining teeth is excessively mobile. Part II will consider the various types of bar, stud, and auxillary attachments for the overdenture.

Dental Abutments↗
PubMed2000

Extracoronal resilient attachments in distal-extension removable partial dentures.

Esthetics is often compromised in patients who wear removable partial dentures with metal clasps placed on anterior teeth. Clinical procedures are presented for a new design of a removable partial denture that improves esthetics and function through a new dental attachment. The extracoronal resilient attachment system offers vertical resiliency and universal stress relief for use where a resilient prosthesis is indicated. The removable partial denture retained by these attachments provides esthetics, vertical resiliency, and easy replacement of worn attachments.

Dental Abutments↗
PubMed2003

[Adhesive attachments for removable partial dentures].

Since twenty years adhesive dentistry plays a certain role in the design of removable partial dentures. With the use of adhesive attachments the esthetics and retention of a removable partial denture can be improved. To apply these attachments successfully the contour of a sound abutment has to be corrected by grinding to provide retention and resistance. The procedures for constructing removable partial dentures with adhesive attachments are described. It is recommended to apply adhesive attachments in the general dental practice.

Adhesives↗
PubMed2003

In vitro retention force changes of prefabricated attachments for overdentures.

Changes in the retention force of six prefabricated spherical and cylindrical attachments were examined in vitro under continuous loading. The testing machine permitted insertion-separation cycles to be tested under reproducible conditions while a calibrated measuring device determined the insertion and retention forces. At the beginning, during the so-called run-in period, all anchoring elements showed a very unstable behaviour characterized by a varying marked increase and subsequent decrease in the retention force. During the ensuing functional period, the retention force followed a more stable course. In this phase, the frictional attachments having lamellae for activation proved more stable than did the spring-loaded retention attachments. Furthermore, in two of five cylindrical anchors by Gerber, the spring broke. This provides support to the concept that prefabricated attachments should be constructed as robust elements composed of as few individual parts as possible. This would help to ensure that service and repairs remain at a minimum. Frictional attachments with lamellae for activation are to be preferred for use in matrices and patrices over attachments having spring-loaded retention.

Dental Prosthesis Retention↗