The document contains 10 tables that evaluate the retentive force of locator attachments placed on parallel and angulated dental implants over multiple pulls. Key findings: - The mean retentive force was highest for parallel implants (27.42N) compared to angulated implants (13.8N) at first pull. - Retentive force decreased with additional pulls and was consistently higher for parallel implants versus angulated implants at 250, 500, 1000, and 2000 pulls. - Retentive force was statistically significantly higher for parallel implants compared to angulated implants at all time intervals tested.

1. TABLE 1 GROUP IA
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with clear nylon cap
placed on two parallel implants(0 degree divergence)at the time of first pull.
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 30.42
2 28.81
3 27.42
4 26.37
5 25.56
INFERENCE : THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WAS FOUND TO BE 30.42 N AND THE MINIMUMVALUE WAS FOUND TO BE 25.56 N. THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE OF THE LOCATOR ATTACHMENTS FOR TWO ANGULATED IMPLANTS AT
THE TIME OF FIRST PULL WAS FOUND TO BE 27.42 N.
30.42
28.81
27.42
26.37 25.56
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1 2 3 4 5
Retenteive force (N)
Retenteive force (N)

2. TABLE 2 GROUP IIA
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with green nylon cap
placed on two angulated implants(40 degree divergence)at the time of first
pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 13.33
2 13.68
3 13.45
4 14.38
5 14.16
MEAN 13.8000
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.45382
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 14.38 N AND THE MINIMUM VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 13.33 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT
THETIME OF FIRST PULL WAS FOUND TO BE 13.8000 N.
13.33
13.68
13.45
14.38
14.16
12.8
13
13.2
13.4
13.6
13.8
14
14.2
14.4
14.6
1 2 3 4 5
RETENTION VALUES(N)
RETENTION VALUES(N)

3. TABLE 3 GROUP IB
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with clear nylon cap
placed on two parallel implants(0 degree divergence)at the time of 250th
pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 26.04
2 25.55
3 24.33
4 23.82
5 23.84
MEAN 24.7160
STANDARD DEVIATION 1.02075
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 26.04 N AND THE MINIMUM VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 23.82 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT
THE TIME OF 250TH PULL WAS FOUND TO BE 24.7160 N.
26.04
25.55
24.33
23.82 23.84
22.5
23
23.5
24
24.5
25
25.5
26
26.5
1 2 3 4 5
Retention

4. TABLE 4 GROUP IIB
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with green nylon cap
placed on two angulated implants(40 degree divergence)at the time of 250th
pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 13.92
2 14.07
3 13.54
4 12.94
5 13.87
MEAN 13.6680
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.45063
INFERENCE:THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 14.07 N AND THE MINIMUM VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 12.94 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT
THETIME OF 250th PULL WAS FOUNDTO BE 13.6680 N.
13.92
14.07
13.54
12.94
13.87
12.2
12.4
12.6
12.8
13
13.2
13.4
13.6
13.8
14
14.2
1 2 3 4 5
RETENTION VALUES(N)

5. TABLE 5 GROUP I C
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with clear nylon cap
placed on two parallel implants(0 degree divergence)at the time of 500th
pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 20.37
2 20.01
3 19.71
4 19.82
5 19.24
MEAN 19.8300
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.41431
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 20.37 N AND THE MINIMUM VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 19.24 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT
THE TIME OF 500TH PULL WAS FOUND TO BE 19.8300 N.
18.6
18.8
19
19.2
19.4
19.6
19.8
20
20.2
20.4
1 2 3 4 5
20.37
20.01
19.71
19.82
19.24
Chart Title
RETENTION VALUES(N)

6. TABLE 6 GROUP II C
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with green nylon cap
placed on two angulated implants(40 degree divergence)at the time of 500th
pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 8.92
2 7.76
3 8.37
4 8.27
5 9.08
MEAN 8.4800
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.53108
INFERENCE:THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 9.08 N ANDTHE MINIMUM VALUE WAS FOUNDTO BE 7.76 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT
THETIME OF 500th PULL WAS FOUNDTO BE 8.4800 N.
8.92
7.76
8.37
8.27
9.08
7
7.5
8
8.5
9
9.5
1 2 3 4 5
RETENTION VALUES(N)

7. TABLE 7 GROUP I D
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with clear nylon cap
placed on two parallel implants(0 degree divergence)at the time of 1000th
pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 17.84
2 14.59
3 14.46
4 17.25
5 13.64
MEAN 15.5560
STANDARD DEVIATION 1.86358
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 17.84 N AND THE MINIMUM VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 13.64 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS.
FOR TWO PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF 1000TH PULL WASFOUND TO BE 15.5560 N
17.84
14.59 14.46
17.25
13.64
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
1 2 3 4 5
RETENTION VALUES(N) Column1 Column2

8. TABLE 8 GROUP II D
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with green nylon cap
placed on two angulated implants(40 degree divergence)at the time of
1000th pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 6.12
2 7.36
3 6.94
4 5.10
5 5.48
MEAN 6.2000
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.95237
INFERENCE:THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 7.36 N ANDTHE MINIMUM VALUE WAS FOUNDTO BE 5.10 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT
THETIME OF 1000th PULL WAS FOUND TO BE 6.2000 N.
6.12
7.36
6.94
5.1
5.48
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1 2 3 4 5
RETENTION VALUES(N)

9. TABLE 9 GROUP I E
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with clear nylon cap
placed on two parallel implants(0 degree divergence)at the time of 2000th
pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 9.36
2 8.52
3 10.38
4 9.58
5 9.16
MEAN 9.4000
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.67572
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 10.38 N AND THE MINIMUM VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 8.52 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT
THE TIME OF 2000TH PULL WASFOUND TO BE 9.4000 N
9.36
8.52
10.38 9.58
9.16
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1 2 3 4 5
RETENTION VALUES(N)

10. TABLE 10 GROUP II E
Basic values of retentive force of locator attachments with green nylon cap
placed on two angulated implants(40 degree divergence)at the time of
2000th pull
S.NO RETENTION VALUES(N)
1 2.6
2 3.1
3 2.7
4 2.5
5 2.6
MEAN 2.7000
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.23452
INFERENCE:THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MAXIMUM
VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 3.1 N ANDTHE MINIMUM VALUE WASFOUND TO BE 2.5 N.THE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCEOF THE LOCATORATTACHMENTS FOR TWO ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT
THETIME OF 2000th PULL WAS FOUND TO BE 2.7000 N.
2.6
3.1
2.7
2.5 2.6
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
1 2 3 4 5
RETENTION VALUES(N)
RETENTION VALUES(N)

11. Table 11 Group IA Vs IIA
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree) Vs two angulated(40 degree divergence) implants at
the time of first pull
GROUP
NO. OF
SAMPLE
RETENTIVE FORCE
MEAN(N) / SD
IA 5 27.71 / 1.940
P = 0.007
IIA 5 13.80 / 0.453
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRST PULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE MEAN RETENTIVEFORCE OF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF
FIRST PULL.
27.71
13.8
IA
IIA

12. Table 12 Group IB Vs IIB
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree) Vs two angulated(40 degree divergence) implants at
the time of 250th pull
GROUP
NO. OF
SAMPLES
RETENTIVE FORCE
MEAN (N) / SD
IB 5 24.7160 / 1.02075
P = 0.00
IIB 5 13.6680 / 0.45063
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF 250TH PULL ISSTATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE MEAN RETENTIVEFORCE OF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF
250TH PULL.
24.716
13.668
IB IIB

13. Table 13 Group IC Vs IIC
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree) Vs two angulated(40 degree divergence) implants at
the time of 500th pull
GROUP
NO. OF
SAMPLE
RETENTIVE FORCE
MEAN (N) / SD
IC 5 19.8300 / 0.41431
P = 0.00
IIC 5 8.4800 / 0.53108
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF 500TH PULL ISSTATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE MEAN RETENTIVEFORCE OF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF
500TH PULL.
19.83
8.48
Retentive Force Mean
IC
IIC

14. Table 14 Group ID Vs IID
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree) Vs two angulated(40 degree divergence) implants at
the time of 1000th pull
GROUP
NO. OF
SAMPLE
RETENTIVE FORCE
MEAN (N) / SD
ID 5 15.556 / 1.86358
P = 0.00
IID 5 6.2000 / 0.95237
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF 1000TH PULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE MEAN RETENTIVEFORCE OF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF
1000TH PULL.
15.556
6.2
Retentive Force Mean
ID
IID

15. Table 15 GROUP IE Vs IIE
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree) Vs two angulated(40 degree divergence) implants at
the time of 2000th pull
GROUP
NO. OF
SAMPLE
RETENTIVE FORCE
MEAN (N) / SD
IE 5 9.4000 / 0.67572
P = 0.00
IIE 5 2.7000 / 0.23452
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF 2000TH PULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE MEAN RETENTIVEFORCE OF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF
2000TH PULL
0
5
10
IE
IIE
9.4
2.7
Mean
Mean

16. TABLE16 GROUP IA Vs IB
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree)implants at the time of first pull Vs 250th pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IA 5 27.71/1.940
P = 0.01
IB 5 24.7160 / 1.02075
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRST PULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 250TH
PULL
27.71
24.716
23
23.5
24
24.5
25
25.5
26
26.5
27
27.5
28
IA IB
Mean

17. Table 17
Group IA Vs IC
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree)implants at the time of first pull Vs 500th pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IA 5 27.7160 / 1.94011
P = 0.00
IC 5 19.8300 / 0.41431
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRST PULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 500TH
PULL
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
IA IC
27.716
19.83
Mean

18. Table 18
Group IA Vs ID
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree)implants at the time of first pull Vs 1000th
pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IA 5 27.7160 / 1.94011
P = 0.00
ID 5 15.5560 / 1.86358
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRST PULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 1000TH
PULL
27.716
15.556
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
IA ID
Mean

19. Table 19
Group IA Vs IE
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two parrallel(0degree)implants at the time of first pull Vs 2000th pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IA 5 27.7160 / 1.94011
P = 0.00
IE 5 9.4000 / 0.67572
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLYSIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF PARALLEL IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRST PULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 2000TH
PULL
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
IA IE
27.716
9.4 Mean

20. Table 20
Group IIA Vs IIB
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two angulated (40degree divergence)implants at the time of first pull Vs
250th pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IIA 5 13.8000 / 0.45382
P = 0.84
IIB 5 13.6680 / 0.45063
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRSTPULL IS STATISTICALLYNOT
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 250TH
PULL
13.8
13.668
Mean
IIA
IIB

21. Table 21
Group IIA Vs IIC
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two angulated (40degree divergence)implants at the time of first pull Vs
500th pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IIA 5 13.8000 / 0.45382
P = 0.00
IIC 5 8.4800 / 0.53108
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRSTPULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 500TH
PULL
Mean
0
5
10
15
IIA
IIC
13.8
8.48
Mean

22. Table 22
Group IIA Vs IID
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two angulated (40degree divergence)implants at the time of first pull Vs
1000th pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IIA 5 13.8000 / 0.45382
P = 0.00
IID 5 6.2000 / 0.95237
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRSTPULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 1000TH
PULL
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
IIA
IID
13.8
6.2
Mean

23. Table 23
Group IIA Vs IIE
Comparitive evaluation of mean retentive forces of locator attachments on
two angulated (40degree divergence)implants at the time of first pull Vs
2000th pull
GROUP
SAMPLE
SIZE
MEAN RETENTIVE FORCE (N)
IIA 5 13.8000 / 0.45382
P = 0.00
IIE 5 2.7000 / 0.23452
 P VALUE LESS THAN 0.05 STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
INFERENCE: THE RESULTS ARE TABULATED BY USING MANN WHITNEY U – TEST , MEAN
RETENTIVE FORCEOF ANGULATED IMPLANTSAT THE TIME OF FIRSTPULL IS STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANTTHAN THE 2000TH
PULL
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
IIA IIE
13.8
2.7
Series 3

24. TABLE24
GROUP RETENTIVE FORCE
IA 27.42
IB 24.72
IC 19.83
ID 15.56
IE 9.400
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
IA IB IC ID IE
RETENTIVE FORCE 27.42 24.72 19.83 15.56 9.4
27.42
24.72
19.83
15.56
9.4
AxisTitle
RETENTIVE FORCE

25. TABLE25
GROUP RETENTIVE FORCE
IIA 13.80
IIB 13.67
IIC 8.48
IID 6.20
IIE 2.70
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
IIA
IIB
IIC
IID
IIE
13.8 13.67
8.48
6.2
2.7
AxisTitle
IIA IIB IIC IID IIE
RETENTIVE FORCE 13.8 13.67 8.48 6.2 2.7
RETENTIVE FORCE

26. TABLE26
A B C D E
I 27.42 24.72 19.83 15.56 9.4
II 13.8 13.67 8.48 6.2 2.7
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
I II
A 27.42 13.8
B 24.72 13.67
C 19.83 8.48
D 15.56 6.2
E 9.4 2.7
27.42
13.8
24.72
13.67
19.83
8.48
15.56
6.2
9.4
2.7