PURPOSE: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess maximum restraining lip force (MLF), maximum voluntary bite force (MBF), and patient-related parameters to evaluate their influence on masticatory function in four groups of participants with different dental states. METHODS: Participants were recruited and assigned to one of four different groups depending on dental status: complete removable dental prostheses (CRDP group); edentulous with two-implant overdentures (IOD group); Kennedy Class I partial removable dental prostheses (PRDP group); or fully dentate (control group). A dental examination was performed and history taken. MLF was measured as the maximum withstood pulling force with three sizes of oral screens, MBF was evaluated using a digital force gauge, and masticatory performance was assessed using a two-color mixing ability test. Linear regression was used to determine the predictive effects of covariates on masticatory performance. Global and pairwise comparisons were also carried out. RESULTS: A total of 68 participants with an average age of 69.3 ± 7.7 years were recruited. MLF depended on the screen size (P = .0004; Kruskal-Wallis) and increased with CRDP use, especially in challenging tasks, such as restraining the smallest screen. The highest MBF was found in dentate participants (P < .0001; Mann-Whitney). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a global significant difference in masticatory performance between groups, with PRDP patients chewing better than CRDP patients. Dental state, time lapse since last tooth loss, and MBF predicted masticatory function. CONCLUSION: Tooth loss significantly affects MBF and masticatory performance. Free-end saddles with a rotational axis in two-implant IODs and Kennedy Class I PRDPs may limit MBF and consequently masticatory performance. CRDP design should facilitate perioral muscular function.
PURPOSE: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess maximum restraining lip force (MLF), maximum voluntary bite force (MBF), and patient-related parameters to evaluate their influence on masticatory function in four groups of participants with different dental states. METHODS:Participants were recruited and assigned to one of four different groups depending on dental status: complete removable dental prostheses (CRDP group); edentulous with two-implant overdentures (IOD group); Kennedy Class I partial removable dental prostheses (PRDP group); or fully dentate (control group). A dental examination was performed and history taken. MLF was measured as the maximum withstood pulling force with three sizes of oral screens, MBF was evaluated using a digital force gauge, and masticatory performance was assessed using a two-color mixing ability test. Linear regression was used to determine the predictive effects of covariates on masticatory performance. Global and pairwise comparisons were also carried out. RESULTS: A total of 68 participants with an average age of 69.3 ± 7.7 years were recruited. MLF depended on the screen size (P = .0004; Kruskal-Wallis) and increased with CRDP use, especially in challenging tasks, such as restraining the smallest screen. The highest MBF was found in dentate participants (P < .0001; Mann-Whitney). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a global significant difference in masticatory performance between groups, with PRDP patients chewing better than CRDP patients. Dental state, time lapse since last tooth loss, and MBF predicted masticatory function. CONCLUSION:Tooth loss significantly affects MBF and masticatory performance. Free-end saddles with a rotational axis in two-implant IODs and Kennedy Class I PRDPs may limit MBF and consequently masticatory performance. CRDP design should facilitate perioral muscular function.