The effect of partial denture clasp design

on abutment tooth movement

Bert l’. Cecconi, D.D.S., MS.,* Kamal Asgar, Ph.D.,**

and Edward Dootz, C.D.T.***
Misawa A.B., Japan, and The University of Michigan, School of Dentistry,
Ann Arbor, Mich.

A series of laboratory tests were undertaken to observe and evaluate the effect
of the partial denture clasp assembly and its component parts on abutment tooth
movement. This article reports the results of the first of these studies.
The design for the free-extension type of removable partial dentures may well
be the enigma of prosthetic dentistry. This could be due to the fact that, even though
many solutions to this perplexing problem have been proposed in the literature, little
research to support them could be found.
Frechettel studied the effect of partial denture design on the distribution of
forces to abutment teeth. His results strongly indicated that the loading and move-
ment of abutment teeth are influenced by the number and location of rests, contour
and rigidity of connectors, and extension of the denture bases. Kairesz reached
essentially the same conclusions and also found a decrease in the size of the occlusal
table decreased vertical and horizontal stresses on the abutment teeth. Clayton3
measured clasp forces exerted on abutment teeth. He concluded that wrought
wire clasps exerted more force on abutment teeth than did cast bar clasps of
comparable lengths. Hekneby4 reported that the inclination of the residual ridge
and the rigidity of the partial denture were important factors in the transmission
of forces from the denture to the abutment teeth. MenCtrey5 recommended the use
of a modified back-action clasp or circumferential clasp for the most favorable force
transmission to the abutment teeth. These, he stated, must be used in conjunction
with a telescopic crown on the abutment teeth. ShoheP compared four types of

The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the United States Air Force
or The Department of Defense.
*Major, USAF.
**Professor, Dental Materials.
***Research Assistant, Dental Materials.

44
$o~~e~ ;5 Effect of cksp design on tooth movement 45
1

clasp assemblies and the relative magnitude of stress imposed by them on the abut-
ment teeth. His results led him to conclude that the C & L type stress-breaker trans-
mitted stresses to the abutment teeth in the most favorable manner.
In clinical studies Fenner, Gerber and Mi.ihlemann? measured mobility changes
of abutment teeth in patients being treated with mandibular free-extension re-
movable partial dentures. In comparing two clasp assemblies no striking differences
in mobility changes could be found.
Both types of clasp assemblies caused significant acute and gradual mobility
changes in the abutment teeth. Carlsson, Hedegard, and Koivumaas reported an
increased mobility of 15 per cent in the abutment teeth when the partial denture
(free-end) was worn by the patient, and a decrease of 13 per cent in mobility of
the abutments when the partial denture was not worn. They also observed a marked
increase in gingival inflammation (65 per cent) after the partial dentures had been
worn for a 12 month period. Kydd, Dutton, and Smith3 found that horizontal forces
exerted on abutment teeth during swallowing were almost twice those exerted during
mastication when computed on a daily basis. Lowe, Kydd, and SmithlO presented
a method of evaluating forces of the tongue in a lateral direction against the lingual
flange of a partial denture. Their results suggested that, in order to minimize lateral
forces of the tongue directed toward dental prosthesis, the lingual flanges should
be as thin as possible.
Increased mobility of, and gingival inflammation around the abutment teeth
share the spotlight as undesirable end-products of removable partial denture
therapy.ll-I3 We have chosen to investigate the first of these detrimental sequelae-
increased mobility of the abutment teeth.
Excessive forces can be transmitted to abutment teeth essentially from two
sources: (1) the occlusion and (2) the movement of the partial denture. Our con-
cern will be with the latter. Forces generated by partial denture movement are trans-
mitted to abutment teeth through the clasp assembly. It is a known biologic fact
that forces directed parallel to the long axis of a tooth are better tolerated than
tipping or torquing forces.14-18 Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to determine
just “how” forces are transmitted through the clasp assembly to the abutment teeth.
The purpose of this laboratory study was twofold: ( 1) to evaluate the reliability
and reproducibility of our testing procedures and apparatus, and (2) to determine
the effect of four different types of partial denture clasp assemblies on the direction
and magnitude of abutment tooth movement.
During all testing procedures mandibular bilateral free-extension removable par-
tial dentures were utilized.

M,ATERIALS AND PROCEDURES

An acrylic resin model of a mandibular arch was made. Ivorine teeth were
positioned in the model with a space of approximately 0.3 mm. between the roots
of the teeth and the acrylic socket. Apices were added to the ivorine teeth with
cold-curing acrylic resin. Root surfaces were notched to assist in retaining the teeth
in the model (Fig. 1). Resin was removed to a depth of 2 to 3 mm. in the posterior
edentulous regions (Fig. 2). Silastic 390 was cured into the posterior regions and
into the space surrounding the roots of the teeth.
46 Cecconi, Asgar, and Dootz .I. Prosth. Dent.
January, 1971

Fig. 1 Fig. 2
Fig. 1. The acrylic resin model of a partially edentulous mandibular arch. The ivorine teeth
that were positioned in the model are also shown.
Fig. 2. The area to be covered by the denture base is recessed in the test model so Mastic 390
could be cured in it.

Fig. 3. The completed test model with Casting No. 3 positioned on it.

A cast Ticonium* bar was attached to the cuspids to simulate an anterior fixed
partial denture. An orthodontic stainless steel rod was cemented into the buccal
cusp of the mandibular left first premolar, and extended about 4 mm. occlusally.
The completed test model is shown in Fig. 3.

*Ticonium Co., Albany, N. Y.

vcaume 25 Effect of clasp design on tooth movement 47
Number 1

Fig. 4 Fig. 5

Fig. 6 Fig. 7
Fig. 4. Casting No. 1. This casting had a clasp assembly consisting of a cast bar retentive clasp
arm, cast lingual bracing arm, and a distal occIusa1 rest.
Fig. 5. Casting No. 2. This casting had a clasp assembly consisting of a cast circumferential
rlstentive clasp arm, cast lingual bracing arm, and a distal occlusal rest.
Fig. 6. Casting No. 3. This casting had a clasp assembly consisting of a cast I-bar retentive
clasp arm, distal guide plane, and a mesial occlusal rest.
Fig. 7. Casting No. 4. This casting had a clasp assembly consisting of an 18 gauge wrought
wire retentive clasp arm, cast lingual bracing clasp arm, and a distal occlusal rest.

TEST APPARATUS
The model was mounted on a piece of 3/a” thick plywood so it could not move.
Two gauges reading to 0.0001” were mounted on this same base. The gauges con-
tacted the orthodontic rod on its mesial and buccal surfaces and at the same level.
Eloth gauges were positively loaded. Thus, movement of the abutment tooth could
b’e observed in four directions: mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual, i.e., a positive
reading on the mesial gauge would indicate a mesial component of movement by
the abutment tooth. A negative reading on the same gauge would indicate distal
movement.

TEST CASTINGS
Four refractory casts were made of the master test model. Wax patterns for
four Ticonium castings were completed on these refractory casts. Markings trans-
ferred from the master model to the refractory casts enabled us to keep the lingual
48 Cecconi, Asgar, and Dootz J. Prosth. Dent.
January, 1971

bar, metal base extension, and loading platform the same in all the wax-ups. Di-
mensions of the various parts of the frameworks were kept constant by using plastic
forms in the wax-up procedure. All castings were identical except for their clasp
assemblies (Figs. 4, 5, 6, and 7).
For Castings Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the occlusal rests and cast reciprocal arms
were the same. Only their buccal retentive arms differed. Casting No. 3 had
an entirely different type clasp assembly. This assembly consisted of a mesial
occlusal rest, distal guide plane, and buccal I-bar retentive clasp armI (Fig.
f-3).
All retentive clasp arms were placed in an 0.010” undercut area.

TESTING PROCEDURES
The amount of load (20 pounds) and the site of load application were constant
throughout the testing procedures. Load application was in five different directions:
vertical, anterior, posterior, buccal, and lingual. An angled ramp, upon which the
test apparatus was placed, enabled us to alter the direction of load application by
changing the position of the model on the ramp (Fig. 8). Five readings were taken
for each load direction.
The direction and magnitude of movement for one abutment tooth (mandible,
left first premolar) was recorded after the load was applied unilaterally to the
partial denture frameworks. Data was obtained when this abutment tooth was on
the same side of the arch as the load application (load side abutment), and when
it was on the opposite side of the arch from the load application (nonload side
abutment). The test apparatus was moved and repositioned after each reading.
Readings were randomly taken by the same person (B. T. C.) .

Fig. 8. A mounted model positioned on a 15 degree slanted ramp. A load in an anterior direc-
tion is being applied to the partial denture framework.
Volume 25 Eflect of clasp design on tooth movement 49
Number 1

Loading was accomplished on a Rhiele Testing Machine at a constant head

speed of 0.07” per minute.

RESULTS
Each partial denture framework was loaded 50 times. The direction and mag-
nitude of movement of the mandibular left premolar for each loading is given in
Tables i to IV. Values shown represent the terminal position of this abutment tooth
after the 20 pound load had been applied to the partial denture.
A total abutment movement (TAM) value was computed as the resultant vector
drawn from the gauge readings for each loading. A TAM mean (based on 5 read-
ings) was computed for each direction-side combination for each of the four cast-
i:ngs. These means are given in Table V. The Duncan’s New Multiple-Range Testing
ProcedurezO was used to compare the means for the four castings for each direction-

l’able I. Casting No. 1 (Fig. 4)) abutment tooth movement*

Unilateral loading
Load side Nonload side
Direction Mes. Dir. BUG. Ling.
of load (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) ;?z; 1 gr; 1 ;:j j :::
0.0003 0.0022 0.0005 0.0005
0.0011 0.0019 0.0010 0.0002
Vertical 0.0019 0.0018 0.0011 0.0002
0.0024 0.0024 0.0008 0.0010
0.0009 0.0005 0.0008 0.000 1

0.0048 0.0042 0.0018 0.0002

0.0052 0.0030 0.0020 -
Anterior 0.0062 0.0037 0.0018 0.0002
0.0038 0.0041 0.0013 0.0001
0.0063 0.0033 0.0022 0.0001

0.0018 0.0002 0.0009 0.0009

0.0015 0.0002 0.0006 0.0020
Posterior 0.0003 0.0001 0.0003 0.0022
0.0012 0.0015 0.0006 0.0016
0.0008 - - 0.0005 0.0018

0.0014 0.0063 0.0022 0.0002

0.0019 0.0047 0.0022 0.0014
Buccal 0.002 1 0.0046 0.0015 0.0003
0.002 1 0.0044 0.0014 0.0011
0.0028 0.0053 0.0014 0.0013

0.0026 0.0015 0.0012 0.0002

0.0033 0.0010 0.0012 0.0001
Lingual 0.0044 0.0013 0.0012 0.0009
0.0025 0.0022 0.0013 0.0004
0.0027 0.0016 0.0013 0.0009
*All readings to nearest 0.0001 in.
50 Cecconi, Asgar, and Dootz J. Pro&. Dent.
January, 1971

Table II. Casting No. 2 (Fig. 5)) abutment tooth movement*

I Unilateral loading
Load side Nonload side
Direction Mes. ) Dis. 1 BUG. 1 Ling. Mes. 1 Dis. 1 But. 1 Ling.
of load ) (in.) 1 (in.) 1 (in.) 1 (in.) 1 (in.) 1 (in.) 1 (in.) 1 (in.)
0.0023 0.0018 0.0014 0.0007
0.0013 0.0016 0.0016 0.0005
Vertical 0.0024 0.0012 0.0020 -
0.0022 0.0011 0.0018 0.0003
0.0016 0.0015 0.0022 0.0009
0.0043 0.0066 0.0017 0.0002
0.0033 0.0033 0.0018 0.0006
Anterior 0.0035 0.0037 0.0022 0.0002
0.0035 0.0043 0.0023 0.0005
0.0041 0.0040 0.0024 0.0002
0.0005 0.0006 0.0015 0.0008
0.0005 0.0006 0.002 1 0.0003
Posterior 0.0006 0.0009 0.0017 0.0002
0.0004 0.0007 0.0015 0.0010
- 0.0003 0.0020 0.0006
0.0024 0.0055 0.0016 0.0009
0.0030 0.0046 0.0023 0.0005
Buccal 0.0031 0.0061 0.0019 0.0011
0.0034 0.0050 0.0022 0.0025
0.0030 0.0045 0.0018 0.0004
0.0042 0.0004 0.0018 0.0005
0.0045 0.0018 0.0014 0.0004
Lingual 0.0037 0.0018 0.0015 0.0005
0.0031 0.0016 0.0015 0.0003
0.0018 0.0013 0.0019 0.0014
*All readings to nearest 0.0001 in.

side combination. The testing was done at the 0.05 level of significance. Table VI
gives the cast numbers, instead of means, which were not statistically different.
Those castings that do not differ have the same continuous line under the num-
bers.
Casting No. 3 (Fig. 6) caused significantly more abutment tooth movement than
any of the other castings for seven of the ten combinations. There was no particular
choice between castings Nos. 1, 2, or 4, as to their effect on abutment tooth move-
ment.

DISCUSSION
Results obtained from this laboratory study will be discussed in relation to the
direction of abutment tooth movement (Fig. 9)) and in relation to the magnitude
of abutment movement (Fig. 10).
‘~volmr ‘: Effect of clasp design on tooth movement 51

‘Table III. Casting No. 3 (Fig. 6)) abutment tooth movement*

Unilateral loading

Direction Mes.
of load (in.)
0.0022 0.0025 0.0022 0.0022
0.0023 0.0026 0.0021 0.0023
Vertical 0.002 1 0.0024 0.0024 0.0023
0.0022 0.0024 0.0022 0.0024
0.0039 0.0025 0.0019 0.0025

0.0048 0.0052 0.0035 0.0025

0.0048 0.0045 0.0031 0.0014
Anterior 0.0043 0.0048 0.0030 0.0015
0.0045 0.0030 0.0028 0.0008
0.0057 0.005 1 0.0031 0.0035

0.0012 0.0005 0.002 1 0.0032

0.0012 0.0001 0.0023 0.0025
Posterior 0.0005 0.0002 0.0018 0.0012
0.0014 0.0007 0.0023 0.0007
0.0002 0.0012 0.0025 0.0016

0.0018 0.0068 0.003 1 0.003 1

0.0014 0.0074 0.0028 0.0027
Buccal 0.0023 0.0070 0.0027 0.0031
0.0037 0.0046 0.0027 0.0033
0.0042 0.0054 0.003 1 0.0022

0.0052 0.0008 0.0015 0.0005

0.0054 0.0008 0.0013 0.0005
Lingual 0.0037 0.0014 0.0018 0.0004
0.005 1 0.002 1 0.0017 0.0009
0.0036 0.0013 0.0013 0.0008
*All readings to nearest 0.0001 in.

DIRECTION
As illustrated in Fig. 9, the dominant direction of movement for the abutment
tooth was mesial-buccal when it was the load side abutment. This movement oc-
curred in 84 of the 100 load side readings for the four clasp assemblies tested. This
was not the type of movement we expected. It was assumed beforehand that most,
if not all, of the movement would be in essentially a distal direction.
When the abutment tooth was the nonload side abutment, the prevailing direction
of abutment movement was in a mesial-lingual direction.
It is evident that, for our testing conditions, the direction of abutment tooth
movement was not significantly altered by clasp design. This observation gives rise
to several important questions. If the clasp assembly per se does not significantly
alter direction of abutment tooth movement, what does? Could these factors be
52 Cecconi, Asgar, and Dootz J. Prosth. Dent.
January, 1971

Table IV. Casting No. 4 (Fig. 7)) abutment tooth movement*

Unilateral loading
Load side Nonload side
Direction Mes. Dis. BUG. Ling. Mes. ’ BUG. Ling.
of load (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) finij (in.) (in.)
0.0005 0.0006 0.0010 0.0004
0.0010 - 0.0011 0.0007
Vertical 0.0005 0.002 1 0.0011 0.0011
0.0010 0.002 1 0.0011 -
0.0012 0.0002 0.0008 0.0014
0.0033 0.0038 0.0012 0.0005
0.0034 0.0023 0.0020 0.0008
Anterior 0.0023 0.0016 0.0014 0.0005
0.0031 0.0020 0.0012 0.0003
0.0043 0.0041 0.0014 -
0.0011 0.0005 0.0003 0.0013 0.0008
0.0012 0.0008 0.0015
Posterior 0.0008 0.0002 0.0010 0.0013
0.0004 0.0004 0.0010 0.0006 *
0.0014 0.0002 0.0010 0.002 1
0.0009 0.0071 0.0023 0.0016
0.0016 0.0053 0.0008 0.0013
Buccal 0.002 1 0.0057 0.0023 0.0010
0.0012 0.0052 0.0018 0.0019
0.0014 0.0060 0.0025 0.0020
0.0030 0.0005 0.0003 0.0004
0.0019 0.0026 0.0009 0.0002
Lingual 0.0020 0.0020 0.0002 - -
0.0020 0.0018 0.0003 0.0001
0.0020 0.0016 0.0001 0.0013
*All readings to nearest 0.0001 in.

identified? Could they be controlled to our advantage? The answers to these ques-
tions we attempted to ascertain in subsequent studies.

MAGNITUDE
As the statistical analysis of our data showed, the magnitude of abutment move-
ment was surprisingly similar for three of the four clasp assemblies tested, (Fig. 10).
It is interesting to note that all three of these assemblies were of like design except
for their retentive arms (Figs. 4, 5, and 7). Only casting No. 3 (Fig. 6)) which had
a completely different clasp assembly design, caused greater movement of the abut-
ment tooth.
These observations indicated to us that factors of clasp assembly design, other
than type of retentive clasp arm, more significantly effect the magnitude of abutment
tooth movement,
yules ;5 Efiect of cksp design on tooth movement 53

Table V. Total abutment movement (TAM) means

Casting No.
Side Direction I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4
Load Vertical 0.00229 0.00246 0.00358 0.00150
Anterior 0.00646 0.00578 0.00663 0.0043 1
Posterior 0.00127 0.00075 0.00116 0.00105
Buccal 0.00549 0.00596 0.00694 0.00605
Lingual 0.00350 0.00378 0.00480 0.00287
Nonload Vertical 0.00099 0.00189 0.00319 0.00133
Anterior 0.00183 0.00212 0.00373 0.00152
Posterior 0.00183 0.00188 0.00295 0.00167
Buccal 0.00201 0.0023 1 0.00409 0.00253
Lingual 0.00137 0.00176 0.00165 0.00065
Pooled variance (among reading/combination) = 0.0000003488 with 160 degrees of free-
dom.

Table VI. Test results on comparison among castings for each direction-side
combination (casting number used instead of means)

Order
Side Direction I (lowest) 2 I 3 / 4 (highest)
L,oad Vertical 4” It 2 3
Anterior 4 2 1 3
Posterior 2 4 3 1
Buccal 1 2 4 3
Lingual 4 1 2 3

Nonload Vertical 1 4 2 3
Anterior 4 1 2 3
Posterior 4 1 2 3
Buccal 1 2 4 3
Lingual 4 1 3 2

*Casting number.
tNote: Any means underscored by the same line are not significantly different (P 0.05).
Any means not underscored by the same line are significantly different (P 0.05).

SUMMARY
A method of observing in the laboratory, the movement of abutment teeth
supporting a mandibular removable partial denture was evaluated. The results
show this testing design to be reliable.
Four different clasp assemblies were compared as to their effect on abutment
tooth movement. A statistical analysis of the data showed that Casting No. 3 (Fig. 6)
caused signifkantly greater abutment tooth movement than did the other clasp
assemblies tested.
54 Cecconi, Asgar, and Dootz J. Pro& Dent.
Jammy. 1971

Fig. 9. A summary chart illustrating the direction of abutment teeth movement after the cast-
ings were loaded (50 loadings per casting).

Fig. 10. Summary chart illustrating the average magnitude of abutment tooth movement after
the castings were loaded (50 loadings per casting).
Volume 25 Effect of clasp design on tooth movement 55
Number 1

CONCLUSIONS
Under these testing conditions, the clasp assembly consisting of a mesial-occlusal
rest, distal guide plane, and buccal I-bar retentive clasp arm (Fig. 6) caused sig-
nificantly greater movement of the abutment tooth than did the other assemblies.
Castings Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (Figs. 4, 5, and 7) did not significantly differ as to their
effect on abutment tooth movement.
The direction of abutment tooth movement was not significantly altered by clasp
design.
Our experimental results did not indicate a “best” clasp design.
The testing apparatus and procedures used in this laboratory study proved to
be reliable and could be easily reproduced.

The authors wish to thank Mr. Alton Rahe, mathematical statistician at the USAF School
of Aerospace Medicine, for the statistical analysis of the data.

Aleferences
1. Frechette, A.: Influence of Partial Denture Design on Distribution of Force on Abutment
Teeth, J. PROSTH. DENT. 6: 195-212, 1956.
2. Kaires, A.: Effect of Partial Denture Design on Bilateral Force Distribution, J. PROSTH.
DENT. 6: 373-385, 1956.
3. Clayton, J.: Measurement of Clasp Forces on Teeth, Thesis, University of Michigan, 1966.
4. Hekneby, M.: Model Experiments on the Transmission of Forces From a Lower Free-end
Partial Denture to the Supporting Teeth, Tandlaegebladet p. 1067, Nov. 1967.
5. MenCtrey, J.: Etude Experimental Comparative sur divers Types de Crochets et la Cou-
ronne Telescopique dans les des Classes I et II de Kennedy, Thesis No. 234 Univ. Geneva,
1966.
6. Shohet, H.: Relative Magnitudes of Stress on Abutment Teeth With Different Retainers.
J. PROSTH. DENT. 21: 267-282, 1969.
7. Fenner, W., Gerber, A., and Miihlemann, H. R.: Tooth Mobility Changes During Treat-
ment With Partial Denture Prosthesis, J. PROSTH. DENT. 6: 520-525, 1956.
8. Carlsson, G., Hedegard, B., and Koivumaa, K.: Studies in Partial Denture Prosthesis.
II. An Investigation of Mandibular Partial Dentures With Double Extension Saddles,
Acta Odont. Stand. 19: 215, 1961.
9. Kydd, W., Dutton, D., and Smith, D.: Lateral Forces Exerted on Abutment Teeth by
Partial Dentures, J. A. D. A. 68: 859, 1964.
IO. Lowe, R., Kydd, W., and Smith, D.: Swallowing and Resting Forces Related to Lingual
Flange Thickness in Removable Partial Dentures, J. PROSTH. DENT. 23: 279-288, 1970.
11. Anderson, J., and Lammie, G.: A Clinical Survey of Partial Dentures, Brit. Dent. J, 92:
59-67, 19.52.
12. Seeman, S.: A Study of the Relationship Between Periodontal Disease and the Wearing
of Partial Dentures, Austral. Dent. J. 8: 206-208, 1963.
13. Carlsson, G., Hedegard, B., and Koivumaa, K.: Studies in Partial Denture Prosthesis. IV.
Final Results of a 4 Year Longitudinal Investigation of Dentogingivally Supported Partial
Dentures, Acta Odont. Stand. 23: 443-472, 1965.
14. Ramfjord, S., and Ash, M.: Occlusion, ed. 1, Philadelphia and London, 1966, W. B. Saun-
ders Company, pp. 84-92, 125.
15. Beyron, H.: Characteristics of Functionally Optimal Occlusion and Principles of Occlusal
Rehabilitation, J. A. D. A. 48: 648, 1954.
16. Box, H.: Twelve Periodontal Studies, Toronto, 1940, University of Toronto Press.
17. Brietner, C.: Alteration of Occlusal Relations Induced by Experimental Procedures, Amer.
J. Orthodont. 29: 277, 1943.
56 Cecconi, Asgar, and Dootz J. Pro&. Dent.
January, 1971

18. Glickman, I.: Clinical Periodontology, ed. 3, Philadelphia and London, 1964, W. B. Saun-
ders Company, pp. 695-749.
19. Kratochvil, F.: Influences of Occlusal Rest Position and Clasp Design on Movement of
Abutment Teeth, J. PROSTH. DENT. 13: 114-124, 1963.
20. Steel, R., and Torrie, J.: Principles and Procedures of Statistics, New York, 1960, Mc-
Graw-Hill Book Company, Inc., pp. 107-109.

MAJOR BERT T. CECCONI

475TH USAF HOSPITAL
Box 6384
APO, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF. 96519

DR. ASGAR AND MR. DOOTZ

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
SCHOOL OF DENTISTRY
ANN ARBOR, MICH. 48104