Need for classification Requirements of an acceptable method of classification. Names of various classifications for partially edentulous arch.

h. Kennedy Classification Principal Advantages of the kennedy classification. Applegates rules for applying the kennedy classification.

Need for classification

Improved intraoperator consistency Improved professional communication An objective method for patient screening in dental education.

Standardized criteria for outcomes assessment and research.

Improved diagnostic consistency.

A simplified, organized aid in the decisionmaking process relating to referral.

Requirements for classification

The classification of a partially edentulous arch should satisfy the following requirements Allow visualization of the type of partially edentulous
arch being considered. Permit differentiation between tooth supported & tooth-tissue supported partial dentures. Serve as a guide to the type of design to be used. Be universally acceptable

VARIOUS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

Cummers classification(1920) Kennedys classification(1923) Neurohrs classification (1939) Bailyns classification Applegates modification & rules(1960)

CLASSIFICATION BASED ON SUPPORT

The Tissue Supported RPD

The Tooth Supported RPD

The Tooth-Tissue Supported RPD

 This simplified classification does not adequately describe the design that must be considered. This system is not suited for the general use in Discussing Identifying Planning prostheses

Classification of partially edentulous arches

Kennedy method of classification in 1923

kennedy

k. Class I

k. Class II

k. Class III

k. Class IV

Class I
Bilateral edentulous areas located posterior to the remaining natural teeth.

Class II
Unilateral edentulous area located posterior to the remaining natural teeth.

Class III
.

Unilateral edentulous area with natural teeth both anterior and posterior to it.

Class IV
Single bilateral edentulous area located anterior to the remaining natural teeth.

Principal Advantages of the kennedy classification

It permits immediate visualization of the partially edentulous arch and allows easy distinction b\w toothsupported versus tooth-tissue supported prostheses

Applegates modification
Dr .O.C .Applegate (1960) Class V edentulous area bounded anteriorly & posteriorly
by natural teeth but the anterior abutment is not suitable for support.

 Class VI - edentulous area in which teeth adjacent to the space are capable of total support of the required prostheses .

Acceptance has not be universal

Applegate's Rules
Applegate provided the following eight rules to govern the application of the Kennedy system :

Rule 1.
Classification should follow rather than precede extraction that might alter the original classification.

Rule 2
If the third molar is missing and not to be replaced it is not considered in the classification.

Rule 3
If a third molar is present and is to be used as an abutment, it is considered in the classification.

Rule 4
If a second molar is missing and is not to be replaced (that is, the opposing second molar is also missing and is not to be replaced), it is not considered in the classification.

Rule 5:
The most posterior edentulous area or areas always determine the classification.

Rule 6
Edentulous areas other than those determining the classification are referred to as modification spaces and are designated by their number.

Rule 7
The extent of the modification is not considered only the number of additional edentulous areas.

Rule8
There can be no modification areas in class IV arches.

 Most common occurrence class I arches Least common - class IV arches There are over 65,000 possible combinations of teeth & edentulous spaces in opposing arches.

Modifications

Conclusion
Two principal benefits might occur from the universal adaption of such a system for prosthodontics. One it would open channels of communication between speaker and listener.

Secondly it would contribute materially to the systematization of the art of partial denture design proposed by different clinician; the dental literature abounds with proposed system for classifying the partially edentulous arches.

 As a result as on today a classification that describes the various positions of teeth and saddle and looks closely at the support and gives a idea of design, and helps in ease of understanding, communication is still a matter of debate.