Abstract
Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of removable denture design on patients’ phonetic adaptation.
Methods: This cross sectional study was performed in ”Medasko” between January 2014 and December 2016. One hundred and sixteen patients were randomly selected, 80 met the inclusion criteria and agreed to participate. The control group consisted of 50 age matched individuals without tooth loss. According to a pre-established protocol 650 standardized speech samples were video recorded and assessed. The study was approved by the Riga Stradins University Research Ethics Committee. Data were entered into SPSS 20 and statistical analysis was performed using the chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests. Odds Ratios (OR) were calculated. The significance level of p<0.05 was used.
Results: A reduced functional value (FV) of dentures was found in 42 (53%) of patients [28 Complete Dentures (CD), 14 Partial Dentures(PD)], these prostheses were fabricated more than 3 years ago (range 12-148 months). Lack of correspondence between the anatomical landmarks (papilla incisive, rugae palatine) and the position of artificial teeth in the dentures was found in 24 (30%), more frequently in patients with CD (20 (83%) and 4 (14%) with PD (OR 13.75.56 (95% CI 1.13 to 12.41)). Distorted speech was found in 7(14%) of the control group and in 30 study group subjects: 22 (73%) CD, 8 (27%) PD (p=0.004). Out of 22 patients with CD and distorted speech performance, 18 (82%) had dentures with reduced FV. In patients with clinically acceptable FV, speech distortion was found only in 4 (18%), similar to the control group 7 (14%). Alteration in extra oral anatomical landmarks during speech was found in 33 subjects- 3 (6%) control group and 30 (37%) study group ( 25 CD (p<0.001), 5 PD (p=0.098)). Twenty nine patients (17 CD, 12 PD) (p=0.076), 22(76%) had dentures with reduced FV and were unsatisfied with the result of their oral rehabilitation.
Conclusions: Functional value and the structure of the removable dentures have impact both on precision of speech production and patient’s subjective evaluation of the result of oral rehabilitation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.