Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities
Identifieur interne : 004F13 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 004F12; suivant : 004F14Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities
Auteurs : Krishan K. KapurSource :
- The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry [ 0022-3913 ] ; 1991.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Abutment, Abutment teeth, Average patient, Average person, Baseline, Baseline interval, Blade implant, Blade implants, Carrot, Complete series, Dent, Dental implant, Dental implant study, Dental implants, Dental service, Dentistry, Dentition, Denture, Edentulous, Edentulous conditions, Entry masticatory scores, Experimental side, Finer particle size, Fpd, Implant, Intact dentition, Kapur, Kennedy class, Loma, Loma linda, Mastication, Masticatory, Masticatory ability, Masticatory function, Masticatory performance, Masticatory performance scores, Masticatory performances, Masticatory scores, Masticatory tests, Medical center, Nonexperimental, Nonexperimental side, Nonexperimental sides, Older group, Older patients, Partial dentures, Peanuts, Performance gains, Performance improvements, Performance scores, Periodontal, Periodontal health, Posterior teeth, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Removable, Removable prosthodontics, Right side, Rpds, Scores, Side performances, Side right side, Significant differences, Subgroup, Success rate, Test food, Test foods, Threshold performance, Threshold performances, Treatment completion, Treatment failures, Treatment groups, Treatment modalities, Ucla school, Veterans administration, Younger group, Younger patients.
- Teeft :
- Abutment, Abutment teeth, Average patient, Average person, Baseline, Baseline interval, Blade implant, Blade implants, Carrot, Complete series, Dent, Dental implant, Dental implant study, Dental implants, Dental service, Dentistry, Dentition, Denture, Edentulous, Edentulous conditions, Entry masticatory scores, Experimental side, Finer particle size, Fpd, Implant, Intact dentition, Kapur, Kennedy class, Loma, Loma linda, Mastication, Masticatory, Masticatory ability, Masticatory function, Masticatory performance, Masticatory performance scores, Masticatory performances, Masticatory scores, Masticatory tests, Medical center, Nonexperimental, Nonexperimental side, Nonexperimental sides, Older group, Older patients, Partial dentures, Peanuts, Performance gains, Performance improvements, Performance scores, Periodontal, Periodontal health, Posterior teeth, Prosthet, Prosthet dent, Prosthetic, Removable, Removable prosthodontics, Right side, Rpds, Scores, Side performances, Side right side, Significant differences, Subgroup, Success rate, Test food, Test foods, Threshold performance, Threshold performances, Treatment completion, Treatment failures, Treatment groups, Treatment modalities, Ucla school, Veterans administration, Younger group, Younger patients.
Abstract
Abstract: Five Veterans Administration Medical Centers participated in a study to determine the comparative influence of fixed partial dentures (FDPs) supported by endosteal blade implants and removable partial dentures (RPDs) on masticatory performance. The study design, methodology, and success rates have been described in Parts I and II. A total of 232 patients received comprehensive dental care, including RPDs for 118 patients and FPDs for 114. Three standardized masticatory tests were made with peanuts and carrots before treatment. These tests were repeated at 16 weeks following RPD or implant insertion and thereafter at 6, 18, 36, and 60 months. At entry, there were no significant differences in performance scores and chewing time and strokes taken to reach the swallowing threshold between the RPD and FPD groups (p > 0.05). After treatment completion, FPDs and RPDs significantly improved the masticatory ability of patients with Kennedy class I or class II edentulous conditions (p < 0.001). The improvements in performance scores for both test foods were slightly better in the RPD group than in the FPD group, although none of the 30 mean differences was significant (p > 0.05). After the baseline period to 60 months, only slight changes in performance scores were observed for both groups. RPDs and FPDs were comparable in improving the chewing efficiency of patients with Kennedy class I and class II partially edentulous conditions.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(91)90174-U
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</title><author><name sortKey="Kapur, Krishan K" sort="Kapur, Krishan K" uniqKey="Kapur K" first="Krishan K." last="Kapur">Krishan K. Kapur</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif., USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64</idno><date when="1991" year="1991">1991</date><idno type="doi">10.1016/0022-3913(91)90174-U</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">004F13</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">004F13</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</title><author><name sortKey="Kapur, Krishan K" sort="Kapur, Krishan K" uniqKey="Kapur K" first="Krishan K." last="Kapur">Krishan K. Kapur</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif., USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YMPR</title><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1991">1991</date><biblScope unit="volume">65</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="272">272</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="283">283</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term><term>Abutment teeth</term><term>Average patient</term><term>Average person</term><term>Baseline</term><term>Baseline interval</term><term>Blade implant</term><term>Blade implants</term><term>Carrot</term><term>Complete series</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental implant</term><term>Dental implant study</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dental service</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Dentition</term><term>Denture</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous conditions</term><term>Entry masticatory scores</term><term>Experimental side</term><term>Finer particle size</term><term>Fpd</term><term>Implant</term><term>Intact dentition</term><term>Kapur</term><term>Kennedy class</term><term>Loma</term><term>Loma linda</term><term>Mastication</term><term>Masticatory</term><term>Masticatory ability</term><term>Masticatory function</term><term>Masticatory performance</term><term>Masticatory performance scores</term><term>Masticatory performances</term><term>Masticatory scores</term><term>Masticatory tests</term><term>Medical center</term><term>Nonexperimental</term><term>Nonexperimental side</term><term>Nonexperimental sides</term><term>Older group</term><term>Older patients</term><term>Partial dentures</term><term>Peanuts</term><term>Performance gains</term><term>Performance improvements</term><term>Performance scores</term><term>Periodontal</term><term>Periodontal health</term><term>Posterior teeth</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Removable</term><term>Removable prosthodontics</term><term>Right side</term><term>Rpds</term><term>Scores</term><term>Side performances</term><term>Side right side</term><term>Significant differences</term><term>Subgroup</term><term>Success rate</term><term>Test food</term><term>Test foods</term><term>Threshold performance</term><term>Threshold performances</term><term>Treatment completion</term><term>Treatment failures</term><term>Treatment groups</term><term>Treatment modalities</term><term>Ucla school</term><term>Veterans administration</term><term>Younger group</term><term>Younger patients</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Abutment</term><term>Abutment teeth</term><term>Average patient</term><term>Average person</term><term>Baseline</term><term>Baseline interval</term><term>Blade implant</term><term>Blade implants</term><term>Carrot</term><term>Complete series</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dental implant</term><term>Dental implant study</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Dental service</term><term>Dentistry</term><term>Dentition</term><term>Denture</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous conditions</term><term>Entry masticatory scores</term><term>Experimental side</term><term>Finer particle size</term><term>Fpd</term><term>Implant</term><term>Intact dentition</term><term>Kapur</term><term>Kennedy class</term><term>Loma</term><term>Loma linda</term><term>Mastication</term><term>Masticatory</term><term>Masticatory ability</term><term>Masticatory function</term><term>Masticatory performance</term><term>Masticatory performance scores</term><term>Masticatory performances</term><term>Masticatory scores</term><term>Masticatory tests</term><term>Medical center</term><term>Nonexperimental</term><term>Nonexperimental side</term><term>Nonexperimental sides</term><term>Older group</term><term>Older patients</term><term>Partial dentures</term><term>Peanuts</term><term>Performance gains</term><term>Performance improvements</term><term>Performance scores</term><term>Periodontal</term><term>Periodontal health</term><term>Posterior teeth</term><term>Prosthet</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthetic</term><term>Removable</term><term>Removable prosthodontics</term><term>Right side</term><term>Rpds</term><term>Scores</term><term>Side performances</term><term>Side right side</term><term>Significant differences</term><term>Subgroup</term><term>Success rate</term><term>Test food</term><term>Test foods</term><term>Threshold performance</term><term>Threshold performances</term><term>Treatment completion</term><term>Treatment failures</term><term>Treatment groups</term><term>Treatment modalities</term><term>Ucla school</term><term>Veterans administration</term><term>Younger group</term><term>Younger patients</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Abstract: Five Veterans Administration Medical Centers participated in a study to determine the comparative influence of fixed partial dentures (FDPs) supported by endosteal blade implants and removable partial dentures (RPDs) on masticatory performance. The study design, methodology, and success rates have been described in Parts I and II. A total of 232 patients received comprehensive dental care, including RPDs for 118 patients and FPDs for 114. Three standardized masticatory tests were made with peanuts and carrots before treatment. These tests were repeated at 16 weeks following RPD or implant insertion and thereafter at 6, 18, 36, and 60 months. At entry, there were no significant differences in performance scores and chewing time and strokes taken to reach the swallowing threshold between the RPD and FPD groups (p > 0.05). After treatment completion, FPDs and RPDs significantly improved the masticatory ability of patients with Kennedy class I or class II edentulous conditions (p < 0.001). The improvements in performance scores for both test foods were slightly better in the RPD group than in the FPD group, although none of the 30 mean differences was significant (p > 0.05). After the baseline period to 60 months, only slight changes in performance scores were observed for both groups. RPDs and FPDs were comparable in improving the chewing efficiency of patients with Kennedy class I and class II partially edentulous conditions.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>masticatory</json:string><json:string>kennedy class</json:string><json:string>denture</json:string><json:string>performance scores</json:string><json:string>baseline</json:string><json:string>implant</json:string><json:string>treatment groups</json:string><json:string>fpd</json:string><json:string>kapur</json:string><json:string>rpds</json:string><json:string>carrot</json:string><json:string>masticatory scores</json:string><json:string>masticatory performance</json:string><json:string>treatment completion</json:string><json:string>right side</json:string><json:string>abutment</json:string><json:string>subgroup</json:string><json:string>prosthet</json:string><json:string>dentition</json:string><json:string>prosthet dent</json:string><json:string>mastication</json:string><json:string>veterans administration</json:string><json:string>nonexperimental</json:string><json:string>side right side</json:string><json:string>masticatory ability</json:string><json:string>periodontal</json:string><json:string>prosthetic</json:string><json:string>medical center</json:string><json:string>test foods</json:string><json:string>loma</json:string><json:string>dentistry</json:string><json:string>removable</json:string><json:string>abutment teeth</json:string><json:string>partial dentures</json:string><json:string>average person</json:string><json:string>baseline interval</json:string><json:string>edentulous conditions</json:string><json:string>edentulous</json:string><json:string>significant differences</json:string><json:string>dental implant study</json:string><json:string>loma linda</json:string><json:string>threshold performances</json:string><json:string>threshold performance</json:string><json:string>dental implants</json:string><json:string>treatment modalities</json:string><json:string>average patient</json:string><json:string>blade implants</json:string><json:string>older patients</json:string><json:string>older group</json:string><json:string>younger group</json:string><json:string>masticatory performance scores</json:string><json:string>nonexperimental sides</json:string><json:string>finer particle size</json:string><json:string>performance gains</json:string><json:string>masticatory function</json:string><json:string>masticatory performances</json:string><json:string>ucla school</json:string><json:string>peanuts</json:string><json:string>dent</json:string><json:string>periodontal health</json:string><json:string>success rate</json:string><json:string>side performances</json:string><json:string>treatment failures</json:string><json:string>test food</json:string><json:string>blade implant</json:string><json:string>experimental side</json:string><json:string>nonexperimental side</json:string><json:string>posterior teeth</json:string><json:string>masticatory tests</json:string><json:string>intact dentition</json:string><json:string>removable prosthodontics</json:string><json:string>entry masticatory scores</json:string><json:string>younger patients</json:string><json:string>dental service</json:string><json:string>dental implant</json:string><json:string>performance improvements</json:string><json:string>complete series</json:string><json:string>scores</json:string></teeft></keywords><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Maxillofacial prosthetics and dental implants</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><qualityIndicators><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>227</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1457</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>1</keywordCount><score>9.724</score><pdfWordCount>6102</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>41542</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>12</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>612.28 x 864.28 pts</pdfPageSize></qualityIndicators><title>Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</title><pii><json:string>0022-3913(91)90174-U</json:string></pii><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><title>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><publicationDate>1991</publicationDate><issn><json:string>0022-3913</json:string></issn><pii><json:string>S0022-3913(05)X8131-8</json:string></pii><volume>65</volume><issue>2</issue><pages><first>272</first><last>283</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>1901</json:string><json:string>1976</json:string><json:string>1001</json:string><json:string>1991</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName><json:string>American Academy of Denture Prosthetics</json:string><json:string>Dental Research Group</json:string><json:string>Oral Biology Research, Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif</json:string><json:string>Veterans Administration Medical Center</json:string><json:string>Veterans Administration Medical Research/ Cooperative Studies Program</json:string><json:string>University of California</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>V. Comparisons</json:string><json:string>Scores</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Canada</json:string><json:string>Toronto</json:string><json:string>Los Angeles</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/6H6-BLRDGB84-4</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - dentistry, oral surgery & medicine</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - health sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - dentistry</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - Oral Surgery</json:string></scopus><inist><json:string>1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string><json:string>2 - sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string><json:string>3 - sciences medicales</json:string><json:string>4 - physiologie humaine appliquee a l'etude des populations et des conditions de vie. ecophysiologie humaine</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1991</publicationDate><author><json:item><name>Krishan K. Kapur D.M.D., M.S.</name><affiliations><json:string>Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif., USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>9190174U</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/6H6-BLRDGB84-4</arkIstex><abstract>Abstract: Five Veterans Administration Medical Centers participated in a study to determine the comparative influence of fixed partial dentures (FDPs) supported by endosteal blade implants and removable partial dentures (RPDs) on masticatory performance. The study design, methodology, and success rates have been described in Parts I and II. A total of 232 patients received comprehensive dental care, including RPDs for 118 patients and FPDs for 114. Three standardized masticatory tests were made with peanuts and carrots before treatment. These tests were repeated at 16 weeks following RPD or implant insertion and thereafter at 6, 18, 36, and 60 months. At entry, there were no significant differences in performance scores and chewing time and strokes taken to reach the swallowing threshold between the RPD and FPD groups (p > 0.05). After treatment completion, FPDs and RPDs significantly improved the masticatory ability of patients with Kennedy class I or class II edentulous conditions (p > 0.001). The improvements in performance scores for both test foods were slightly better in the RPD group than in the FPD group, although none of the 30 mean differences was significant (p > 0.05). After the baseline period to 60 months, only slight changes in performance scores were observed for both groups. RPDs and FPDs were comparable in improving the chewing efficiency of patients with Kennedy class I and class II partially edentulous conditions.</abstract><pmid><json:string>2051364</json:string></pmid><corporate><json:item><name>Participants of CSP No. 86</name></json:item></corporate><serie><title>Dental implants: benefits and risks, and NIH-Harvard Consensus Development Conference</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><pages><first>105</first><last>106</last></pages></serie><copyrightDate>1991</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1016/0022-3913(91)90174-U</json:string></doi><id>9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>©1991 Mosby-Year Book, Inc.</p></availability><date>1991</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note>Presented at the American Academy of Denture Prosthetics meeting, Toronto, Canada.</note><note>Supported by the Veterans Administration Medical Research/ Cooperative Studies Program and conducted by the Veterans Administration CSP No. 86 Dental Research Group.</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</title><author role="org"><orgName>Participants of CSP No. 86</orgName></author><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Krishan K.</forename><surname>Kapur</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">D.M.D., M.S.</roleName><note type="biography">Reprint requests to: Dr. Krishan K. Kapur Chief, Dental Service VA Medical Center Wilshire and Sawtelle Blvds. Los Angeles, CA 90073.</note><note type="biography">Study Chairman, Chief of Dental Service and Oral Biology Research, Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif; Professor-in-Residence of Removable Prosthodontics, University of California at Los Angeles, School of Dentistry.</note><affiliation>Reprint requests to: Dr. Krishan K. Kapur Chief, Dental Service VA Medical Center Wilshire and Sawtelle Blvds. Los Angeles, CA 90073.</affiliation><affiliation>Study Chairman, Chief of Dental Service and Oral Biology Research, Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif; Professor-in-Residence of Removable Prosthodontics, University of California at Los Angeles, School of Dentistry.</affiliation><affiliation>Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif., USA</affiliation></author><idno type="istex">9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/0022-3913(91)90174-U</idno><idno type="PII">0022-3913(91)90174-U</idno><idno type="ArticleID">9190174U</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YMPR</title><idno type="pISSN">0022-3913</idno><idno type="PII">S0022-3913(05)X8131-8</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1991"></date><biblScope unit="volume">65</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="272">272</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="283">283</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1991</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Abstract: Five Veterans Administration Medical Centers participated in a study to determine the comparative influence of fixed partial dentures (FDPs) supported by endosteal blade implants and removable partial dentures (RPDs) on masticatory performance. The study design, methodology, and success rates have been described in Parts I and II. A total of 232 patients received comprehensive dental care, including RPDs for 118 patients and FPDs for 114. Three standardized masticatory tests were made with peanuts and carrots before treatment. These tests were repeated at 16 weeks following RPD or implant insertion and thereafter at 6, 18, 36, and 60 months. At entry, there were no significant differences in performance scores and chewing time and strokes taken to reach the swallowing threshold between the RPD and FPD groups (p > 0.05). After treatment completion, FPDs and RPDs significantly improved the masticatory ability of patients with Kennedy class I or class II edentulous conditions (p < 0.001). The improvements in performance scores for both test foods were slightly better in the RPD group than in the FPD group, although none of the 30 mean differences was significant (p > 0.05). After the baseline period to 60 months, only slight changes in performance scores were observed for both groups. RPDs and FPDs were comparable in improving the chewing efficiency of patients with Kennedy class I and class II partially edentulous conditions.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>article-category</head><item><term>Maxillofacial prosthetics and dental implants</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1991">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier doc found" wicri:toSee="Elsevier, no converted or simple article"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//ES//DTD journal article DTD version 5.0.1//EN//XML" URI="art501.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article version="5.0" xml:lang="en" docsubtype="fla"><item-info><jid>YMPR</jid><aid>9190174U</aid><ce:pii>0022-3913(91)90174-U</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1016/0022-3913(91)90174-U</ce:doi><ce:copyright type="unknown" year="1991">Mosby-Year Book, Inc.</ce:copyright><ce:doctopics><ce:doctopic><ce:text>Maxillofacial prosthetics and dental implants</ce:text></ce:doctopic></ce:doctopics></item-info><head><ce:article-footnote><ce:note-para>Presented at the American Academy of Denture Prosthetics meeting, Toronto, Canada.</ce:note-para></ce:article-footnote><ce:article-footnote><ce:note-para>Supported by the Veterans Administration Medical Research/ Cooperative Studies Program and conducted by the Veterans Administration CSP No. 86 Dental Research Group.</ce:note-para></ce:article-footnote><ce:title>Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:given-name>Krishan K.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:degrees>D.M.D., M.S.</ce:degrees><ce:cross-ref refid="cor1"><ce:sup>*</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="fn1"><ce:sup>*</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:collaboration><ce:text>Participants of CSP No. 86</ce:text><ce:cross-ref refid="fn2"><ce:sup>**</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:collaboration><ce:affiliation><ce:textfn>Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif., USA</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:correspondence id="cor1"><ce:label>*</ce:label><ce:text><ce:italic>Reprint requests to:</ce:italic> <ce:small-caps>Dr. Krishan K. Kapur Chief, Dental Service VA Medical Center Wilshire and Sawtelle Blvds. Los Angeles, CA</ce:small-caps> 90073.</ce:text></ce:correspondence><ce:footnote id="fn1"><ce:label>*</ce:label><ce:note-para>Study Chairman, Chief of Dental Service and Oral Biology Research, Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif; Professor-in-Residence of Removable Prosthodontics, University of California at Los Angeles, School of Dentistry.</ce:note-para></ce:footnote><ce:footnote id="fn2"><ce:label>**</ce:label><ce:note-para>Complete authorship and list of participants appear as addendum on the last page of article.</ce:note-para></ce:footnote></ce:author-group><ce:abstract id="ab1" class="author" xml:lang="en"><ce:section-title>Abstract</ce:section-title><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para>Five Veterans Administration Medical Centers participated in a study to determine the comparative influence of fixed partial dentures (FDPs) supported by endosteal blade implants and removable partial dentures (RPDs) on masticatory performance. The study design, methodology, and success rates have been described in Parts I and II. A total of 232 patients received comprehensive dental care, including RPDs for 118 patients and FPDs for 114. Three standardized masticatory tests were made with peanuts and carrots before treatment. These tests were repeated at 16 weeks following RPD or implant insertion and thereafter at 6, 18, 36, and 60 months. At entry, there were no significant differences in performance scores and chewing time and strokes taken to reach the swallowing threshold between the RPD and FPD groups (<ce:italic>p</ce:italic> > 0.05). After treatment completion, FPDs and RPDs significantly improved the masticatory ability of patients with Kennedy class I or class II edentulous conditions (<ce:italic>p</ce:italic> < 0.001). The improvements in performance scores for both test foods were slightly better in the RPD group than in the FPD group, although none of the 30 mean differences was significant (<ce:italic>p</ce:italic> > 0.05). After the baseline period to 60 months, only slight changes in performance scores were observed for both groups. RPDs and FPDs were comparable in improving the chewing efficiency of patients with Kennedy class I and class II partially edentulous conditions.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract></head><tail><ce:bibliography><ce:section-title>Reference</ce:section-title><ce:bibliography-sec><ce:bib-reference id="bib1"><ce:label>1.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Randow</ce:surname><ce:given-name>K</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Glantz</ce:surname><ce:given-name>PO</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Lager</ce:surname><ce:given-name>B</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Technical failures and some related clinical complications in extensive fixed prosthodontics—the epidemiologic study of long-term clinical quality</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Acta Odontol Scand</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>44</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1986</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>24</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>54</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib2"><ce:label>2.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Nyman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>S</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Lindhe</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>A longitudinal study of combined periodontal and prosthetic treatment of patients with advanced periodontal disease</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Periodontol</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>50</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1979</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>163</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>169</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib3"><ce:label>3.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Izikowitz</ce:surname><ce:given-name>L</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>A long-term prognosis of the fixed saddle-bridge. A study of 100 constructions</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Oral Rehabil</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>3</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1976</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>25</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>40</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib4"><ce:label>4.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Linkow</ce:surname><ce:given-name>LI</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Unilateral subperiosteal implant</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:edited-book><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Dental implants: benefits and risks, and NIH-Harvard Consensus Development Conference</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:edition>7th ed.</sb:edition><sb:book-series><sb:editors><sb:editor><ce:surname>Schnitman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>PA</ce:given-name></sb:editor><sb:editor><ce:surname>Shulman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>LB</ce:given-name></sb:editor></sb:editors><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Publ 81-1531</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:series></sb:book-series><sb:date>1980</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>U.S. Department of Health and Human Services</sb:name><sb:location>Washington, DC</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:edited-book><sb:pages><sb:first-page>105</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>106</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib5"><ce:label>5.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Linkow</ce:surname><ce:given-name>LI</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Benefit of blade implants</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:edited-book><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Dental implants: benefits and risks, an NIH-Harvard Consensus Development Conference</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:edition>7th ed.</sb:edition><sb:book-series><sb:editors><sb:editor><ce:surname>Schnitman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>PA</ce:given-name></sb:editor><sb:editor><ce:surname>Shulman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>LB</ce:given-name></sb:editor></sb:editors><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Publ 81-1531</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:series></sb:book-series><sb:date>1980</sb:date><sb:publisher><sb:name>U.S. Department of Health and Human Services</sb:name><sb:location>Washington, DC</sb:location></sb:publisher></sb:edited-book><sb:pages><sb:first-page>273</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>293</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib6"><ce:label>6.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Cranin</ce:surname><ce:given-name>AN</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Rabkin</ce:surname><ce:given-name>MF</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Garfunkel</ce:surname><ce:given-name>L</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>A statistical evaluation of 952 endosteal implants in humans</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Am Dent Assoc</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>94</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1977</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>315</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>320</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib7"><ce:label>7.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Branemark</ce:surname><ce:given-name>PI</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Hansson</ce:surname><ce:given-name>BO</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Adell</ce:surname><ce:given-name>R</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Breine</ce:surname><ce:given-name>V</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Lindstrom</ce:surname><ce:given-name>J</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Hallenohman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>A</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>2</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:issue-nr>suppl 16</sb:issue-nr><sb:date>1977</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>1</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>132</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib8"><ce:label>8.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Niznick</ce:surname><ce:given-name>GA</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The core-vent implant system</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Oral Implantol</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>10</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1982</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>379</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>418</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib9"><ce:label>9.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kirsch</ce:surname><ce:given-name>A</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Mentag</ce:surname><ce:given-name>P</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The IMZ endosseous two-phase implant systems: a complete oral rehabilitation treatment concept</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Oral Implantol</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>12</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1986</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>576</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>589</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib10"><ce:label>10.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Smithloff</ce:surname><ce:given-name>M</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Fritz</ce:surname><ce:given-name>ME</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The use of blade implants in a selected population of partially edentulous adults. A 15-year report</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Periodontol</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>58</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1987</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>589</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>593</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib11"><ce:label>11.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Albrektsson</ce:surname><ce:given-name>T</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Zarb</ce:surname><ce:given-name>G</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Worthington</ce:surname><ce:given-name>P</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Ericksson</ce:surname><ce:given-name>AR</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>1</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1986</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>11</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>26</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib12"><ce:label>12.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Yurkstas</ce:surname><ce:given-name>A</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Fridley</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HH</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Manly</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RS</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>A functional evaluation of fixed and removable bridgework</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>1</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1951</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>570</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>577</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib13"><ce:label>13.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Gunne</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HSJ</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The effect of removable partial dentures on mastication and dietary intake</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Acta Odontol Scand</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>43</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1985</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>269</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>278</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib14"><ce:label>14.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Abel</ce:surname><ce:given-name>LF</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Manly</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RS</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Masticatory function of partial denture patients among navy personnel</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>3</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1953</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>382</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>392</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib15"><ce:label>15.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:et-al></sb:et-al></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Veterans Administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part I: methodology and comparisons between treatment groups at baseline</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>58</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1987</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>499</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>512</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib16"><ce:label>16.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:et-al></sb:et-al></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Veterans Administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part II: comparisons of success rates and periodontal health between two treatment modalities</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>62</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1989</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>685</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>703</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib17"><ce:label>17.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Yurkstas</ce:surname><ce:given-name>AA</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Manly</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RS</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Value of different test foods in estimating masticatory ability</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Appl Physiol</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>3</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1950</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>45</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>53</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib18"><ce:label>18.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Soman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>S</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Yurkstas</ce:surname><ce:given-name>A</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Test foods for measuring masticatory performance of denture wearers</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>14</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1964</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>483</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>491</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib19"><ce:label>19.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Yurkstas</ce:surname><ce:given-name>AA</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The effect of missing teeth on masticatory performance and efficiency</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>4</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1954</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>120</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>123</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib20"><ce:label>20.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Dahlberg</ce:surname><ce:given-name>B</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The masticatory effect</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Acta Med Scand</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>139</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1942</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>1</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>159</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host><sb:comment>(Suppl)</sb:comment></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib21"><ce:label>21.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Gunne</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HSJ</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Masticatory efficiency and dental state: A comparison of two methods</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Acta Odontol Scand</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>43</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1985</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>139</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>146</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib22"><ce:label>22.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Soman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>SS</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Masticatory performance and efficiency in denture wearers</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>14</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1964</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>687</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>694</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib23"><ce:label>23.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Manly</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RS</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Factors affecting masticatory performance and efficiency among young adults</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Dent Res</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>30</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1951</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>874</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>882</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib24"><ce:label>24.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Feldman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RS</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Alman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>JE</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Chauncey</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HH</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Aging and mastication: changes in performance and in the swallowing threshold with natural dentition</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Am Geriatric Soc</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>28</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1980</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>97</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>103</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib25"><ce:label>25.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Chauncey</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HH</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Feller</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RP</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Wayler</ce:surname><ce:given-name>AH</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Altered masticatory function and perceptual estimates of chewing experience</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Special Care</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>1</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1985</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>250</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>255</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib26"><ce:label>26.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Manly</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RS</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Braley</ce:surname><ce:given-name>LC</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Masticatory performance and efficiency</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Dent Res</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>29</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1950</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>448</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>462</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib27"><ce:label>27.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Soman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>S</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The effect of denture factors on masticatory performance. Part II: influence of the polished surface contour of denture base</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>15</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1965</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>231</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>240</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib28"><ce:label>28.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Soman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>S</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>The effect of denture factors on masticatory performance. Part III: the location of the food platforms</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Prosthet Dent</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>15</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1965</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>451</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>464</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib29"><ce:label>29.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Schnitman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>PA</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Rubenstein</ce:surname><ce:given-name>JE</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Whorle</ce:surname><ce:given-name>PS</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>DaSilva</ce:surname><ce:given-name>JD</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Koch</ce:surname><ce:given-name>GE</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Implants for partial edentulism</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Dent Ed</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>52</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1988</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>725</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>735</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib30"><ce:label>30.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Natiella</ce:surname><ce:given-name>JR</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Armitage</ce:surname><ce:given-name>JE</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Meenaghan</ce:surname><ce:given-name>MA</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Greene</ce:surname><ce:given-name>GW</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Tissue response to dental implants protruding through mucous membrane</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Oral Sci Rev</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>5</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1974</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>85</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>105</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib31"><ce:label>31.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Garrett</ce:surname><ce:given-name>N</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Requirements for clinical trials</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>J Dent Ed</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>52</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1988</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>760</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>764</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference><ce:bib-reference id="bib32"><ce:label>32.</ce:label><sb:reference><sb:contribution><sb:authors><sb:author><ce:surname>Wayler</ce:surname><ce:given-name>AH</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Kapur</ce:surname><ce:given-name>KK</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Feldman</ce:surname><ce:given-name>RS</ce:given-name></sb:author><sb:author><ce:surname>Chauncey</ce:surname><ce:given-name>HH</ce:given-name></sb:author></sb:authors><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Effects of age and dentition status on measures of food acceptability</sb:maintitle></sb:title></sb:contribution><sb:host><sb:issue><sb:series><sb:title><sb:maintitle>Gerontology</sb:maintitle></sb:title><sb:volume-nr>37</sb:volume-nr></sb:series><sb:date>1982</sb:date></sb:issue><sb:pages><sb:first-page>294</sb:first-page><sb:last-page>299</sb:last-page></sb:pages></sb:host></sb:reference></ce:bib-reference></ce:bibliography-sec></ce:bibliography></tail></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities</title></titleInfo><name type="corporate"><namePart>Participants of CSP No. 86</namePart><description>Complete authorship and list of participants appear as addendum on the last page of article.</description></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Krishan K.</namePart><namePart type="family">Kapur</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">D.M.D., M.S.</namePart><affiliation>Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif., USA</affiliation><description>Reprint requests to: Dr. Krishan K. Kapur Chief, Dental Service VA Medical Center Wilshire and Sawtelle Blvds. Los Angeles, CA 90073.</description><description>Study Chairman, Chief of Dental Service and Oral Biology Research, Veterans Administration Medical Center, West Los Angeles, Calif; Professor-in-Residence of Removable Prosthodontics, University of California at Los Angeles, School of Dentistry.</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="Full-length article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1991</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1991</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><abstract lang="en">Abstract: Five Veterans Administration Medical Centers participated in a study to determine the comparative influence of fixed partial dentures (FDPs) supported by endosteal blade implants and removable partial dentures (RPDs) on masticatory performance. The study design, methodology, and success rates have been described in Parts I and II. A total of 232 patients received comprehensive dental care, including RPDs for 118 patients and FPDs for 114. Three standardized masticatory tests were made with peanuts and carrots before treatment. These tests were repeated at 16 weeks following RPD or implant insertion and thereafter at 6, 18, 36, and 60 months. At entry, there were no significant differences in performance scores and chewing time and strokes taken to reach the swallowing threshold between the RPD and FPD groups (p > 0.05). After treatment completion, FPDs and RPDs significantly improved the masticatory ability of patients with Kennedy class I or class II edentulous conditions (p < 0.001). The improvements in performance scores for both test foods were slightly better in the RPD group than in the FPD group, although none of the 30 mean differences was significant (p > 0.05). After the baseline period to 60 months, only slight changes in performance scores were observed for both groups. RPDs and FPDs were comparable in improving the chewing efficiency of patients with Kennedy class I and class II partially edentulous conditions.</abstract><note>Presented at the American Academy of Denture Prosthetics meeting, Toronto, Canada.</note><note>Supported by the Veterans Administration Medical Research/ Cooperative Studies Program and conducted by the Veterans Administration CSP No. 86 Dental Research Group.</note><subject><genre>article-category</genre><topic>Maxillofacial prosthetics and dental implants</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>YMPR</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">199102</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0022-3913</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0022-3913(05)X8131-8</identifier><part><date>199102</date><detail type="volume"><number>65</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>2</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue-pages"><start>A2</start><end>A26</end></extent><extent unit="issue-pages"><start>165</start><end>330</end></extent><extent unit="issue-pages"><start>A27</start><end>A30</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>272</start><end>283</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/6H6-BLRDGB84-4</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1016/0022-3913(91)90174-U</identifier><identifier type="PII">0022-3913(91)90174-U</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">9190174U</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">©1991 Mosby-Year Book, Inc.</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-HKKZVM7B-M">elsevier</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Mosby-Year Book, Inc., ©1991</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 004F13 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 004F13 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:9E3B34C8FBCA86B2A3751B815EF9E0FC948A0E64
|texte= Veterans administration cooperative dental implant study—comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part III: Comparisons of masticatory scores between two treatment modalities
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |