Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 27;20(1):104–109. doi: 10.4103/jips.jips_304_19

Table 2.

Responses by the dental professionals participated in the survey

Question number Questionnaire All GDPs, n (%) Prosthodontists, n (%) Other specialists, n (%) P (<0.05)

n (%) 95% CI

Lower Upper
1 Preference for the rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients in your clinical practice 402 172 (42.79) 190 (47.26) 40 (9.95)
 a  RPDs 32 (7.96) 5.4 10.03 23 (71.87) 7 (21.88) 2 (6.25) 0.0021*
 b  FPDs 173 (43.03) 38.27 47.87 99 (57.22) 63 (36.42) 11 (6.36) 0.0039*
 c  Implants 197 (49.01) 44.11 53.71 50 (25.38) 120 (60.91) 27 (13.71) 0.00007*
2 If you have to choose RPDs, the type of RPDs you would prefer? 402 172 (42.79) 190 (47.26) 40 (9.95)
 a  CPDs 183 (45.53) 40.4 50.12 50 (27.33) 115 (62.84) 18 (9.83) 0.0002*
 b  Acrylic treatment partial dentures 70 (17.41) 13.85 21.18 29 (41.42) 31 (44.29) 10 (14.29) 0.906
 c  Flexible partial dentures 149 (37.06) 32.53 41.93 93 (62.42) 44 (29.53) 12 (8.05) 0.00047*
3 If CPDs are the option, how often does the patient agree for CPDs 383 162 (42.30) 181 (47.26) 40 (10.44)
 a  Very rarely 102 (26.63) 22.42 31.02 59 (57.84) 33 (32.35) 10 (9.80) 0.0039*
 b  Rarely 202 (52.74) 57.67 47.67 88 (43.56) 98 (48.51) 16 (7.92) 0.985
 c  Quite often 70 (18.28) 14.52 22.12 12 (17.41) 44 (62.86) 14 (20) 0.0003*
 d  Very regularly 9 (2.35) 0.89 3.69 3 (33.33) 6 (66.66) 0 0.409
4 Number of CPDs delivered per year in your clinic practice? 402 172 (42.79) 190 (47.26) 40 (9.95)
 a  0 137 (34.08) 28.98 38.18 76 (55.47) 47 (34.31) 14 (10.22) 0.0134*
 b  1–5 186 (46.27) 41.92 51.52 70 (37.63) 99 (53.23) 17 (9.14) 0.189
 c  5–10 38 (9.45) 6.69 12.29 19 (50) 13 (34.21) 6 (15.79) 0.198
 d  >10 41 (10.20) 7.32 13.12 7 (17.07) 31 (75.61) 3 (7.32) 0.0006*
5 Major problems faced while suggesting CPDs to the patients? 389 163 (41.90) 188 (48.33) 38 (9.77)
 a  Fabrication 84 (21.60) 17.6 25.68 28 (33.33) 34 (40.48) 22 (26.19) 0.852
 b  Cost 160 (41.13) 36.24 45.84 84 (52.50) 66 (41.25) 10 (6.25) 0.049*
 c  Fracture 23 (5.91) 3.67 8.27 8 (34.79) 11 (47.82) 4 (17.39) 0.712
 d  Adjustment 122 (31.36) 26.84 35.84 43 (35.25) 77 (63.11) 2 (1.64) 0.043*
6 Do you feel is it justifiable to give acrylic or flexible RPDs as an alternative to CPDs? 402 172 (42.79) 190 (47.26) 40 (9.95)
 a  Yes 224 (55.72) 50.9 60.52 106 (47.32) 93 (41.52) 25 (11.16) 0.192
 b  No 178 (44.28) 39.73 48.81 66 (37.08) 97 (54.49) 15 (8.43) 0.134
7 If CPDs are not the option to Q6, then what is the reason for not recommending CPDs? 364 151 (41.48) 175 (48.08) 38 (10.44)
 a  Too complicated procedure to be carried out 37 (10.17) 23.36 29.36 15 (40.54) 16 (43.24) 6 (16.22) 0.825
 b  Availability of better treatment options such as implant-supported restorations 231 (63.46) 48.04 57.84 99 (42.86) 122 (52.81) 10 (4.33) 0.725
 c  Acrylic or flexible RPDs are better options to CPDs 96 (26.37) 42.56 51.56 37 (38.54) 37 (38.54) 22 (22.92) 0.566
8 Do you recommend giving more importance for teaching CPDs in graduation curriculum when compared to implant-supported treatment modalities? 402 172 (42.79) 190 (47.26) 40 (9.95)
 a  Yes 214 (53.23) 48.14 57.74 96 (44.86) 105 (49.07) 13 (6.07) 0.955
 b  No 188 (46.77) 42.26 52.49 76 (40.43) 85 (45.21) 27 (14.36) 0.947

*Statistically significant (P<0.05). RPDs: Removable partial dentures, FPDs: Fixed partial dentures, CPDs: Cast partial dentures, CI: Confidence interval of proportion, GDPs: General dental practitioners