p. 329−336
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 337−343
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 345−354
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 355−359
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 361−367
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 369−374
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 375−381
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 383−389
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
0.05. Statistically significant differences were observed between the ball and magnetic attachments at different IIDs, P = 0.001. The correlation between the attachment type, IIDs and time for both ball and magnetic attachments were significant, P=0.001. Conclusions: The retention of the ball was more than the magnetic attachment. Inter-implant distance influences the retention of both the ball and magnetic attachments. The retention of ball attachment has been influenced by 12 months of simulated function.]]>
p. 391−399
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C
p. 401−406
2537-0316
Vol.7/No.3-C