Responsiveness of the different methods for assessing the short-term within-subject change in masticatory function after conventional prosthetic treatments

Responsiveness of methods to evaluate objective masticatory function in removable partial denture treatments

“…The results of the gum method indicated no significant effects for the RPD treatment (SRM = 0.1), while a previous study that used a twocolored chewing gum demonstrated small but clinically significant effects (ES = 0.3.0.4) [24]. The lower responsiveness of the gum method in the present study may be attributed to the increased number of chewing strokes (60 strokes), compared to the previous study (15 strokes).…”

“…In addition, the sample sizes of studies that employed a color-changeable chewing gum [17] or an image analysis of food particle sizes [23] were too small to adequately evaluate responsiveness. However, a recent study that used a two-colored chewing gum evaluated responsiveness using a large sample size and found a medium effect size (ES) for a range of prosthetic treatments (e.g., complete dentures, RPDs, and fixed partial dentures) [24]. The number of missing teeth, pattern of partially dentate arches, and range of masticatory performance vary greatly among patients with RPDs [25,26]; therefore, it is important that chewing tests have adequate responsiveness to such variation.…”

Responsiveness of methods to evaluate chewing ability after removable partial denture treatments

“…The effect size for VAS was higher than those for CDS and FIQ, consistent with a previous study. 12 This finding indicates that VAS is the most suitable instrument to evaluate the treatment effect of RPD on subjective chewing ability with respect to responsiveness.…”

“…However, the scope of investigations in the responsiveness of methods to evaluate objective/subjective masticatory function has been very limited 2 . For example, one study used a two‐coloured wax cube to show high levels of responsiveness associated with removable partial denture (RPD) treatment, 11 and a more recent study evaluated the responsiveness of a two‐coloured chewing gum method, a visual analogue scale (VAS) with 0‐10 numerical endpoints and 3/5‐point Likert scales for chewing difficulty to assess a range of prosthetic treatments (eg, complete dentures, RPDs and fixed partial dentures) 12 . In addition, stabilisation of RPDs using mini‐implants improved food mixing ability, as evaluated using a two‐coloured chewing gum 13 .…”

“…2 For example, one study used a two-coloured wax cube to show high levels of responsiveness associated with removable partial denture (RPD) treatment, 11 and a more recent study evaluated the responsiveness of a two-coloured chewing gum method, a visual analogue scale (VAS) with 0-10 numerical endpoints and 3/5-point Likert scales for chewing difficulty to assess a range of prosthetic treatments (eg, complete dentures, RPDs and fixed partial dentures). 12 In addition, stabilisation of RPDs using mini-implants improved food mixing ability, as evaluated using a two-coloured chewing gum. 13 The findings of these studies suggest that the responsiveness of these evaluation methods for masticatory function are dependent on the food types, chewing conditions, types of questionnaires used and the types of prosthodontic treatments.…”