Literature DB >> 10756292

Treatment outcomes of fixed or removable implant-supported prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part I: patients' assessments.

N U Zitzmann1, C P Marinello.   

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Distinct clinical parameters determine whether fixed or removable implant-supported prostheses are indicated to restore the edentulous maxilla. However, there is a strong belief that fixed implant prostheses meet with greater patient acceptance and satisfaction, but this may differ from the patients' perceptions, their psychological responses to treatment, and their assessments of the treatment outcome.
PURPOSE: This prospective clinical study compared the treatment outcomes of fixed and removable implant-supported restorations in the edentulous maxilla with the main emphasis on the patient's point of view.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty patients who requested an implant-supported superstructure to restore the edentulous maxilla were asked to complete a questionnaire measuring their satisfaction with the present situation and the psychologic impact of their oral health status with their responses marked on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Ten patients were treated with a fixed, screw-retained implant prosthesis (group 1), and 10 were treated with a removable, implant-supported and bar-retained overdenture (group 2). Six months after prosthetic rehabilitation, patients were again given the questionnaire to assess their psychologic well-being and satisfaction with the implant-supported restoration.
RESULTS: Both prosthesis designs were associated with significant improvements in comfort and retention, function, esthetics and appearance, taste, speech, and self-esteem. No difference was found between the 2 groups with respect to how the patients assessed the implant therapy. However, the results indicated that patients in group 2 experienced greater differences between pretreatment and posttreatment scores for the parameters esthetics, taste, and speech. Treatment costs per unit were significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2.
CONCLUSION: Patients in groups 1 and 2 were similarly satisfied with their implant-supported prostheses in the edentulous maxilla with regard to their well-being and the cost-utility, irrespective of whether the restoration was fixed or removable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10756292     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70037-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  6 in total

1.  Patient satisfaction with oral implant rehabilitation: evaluation of responses to a questionnaire.

Authors:  Susanna Annibali; Anna Rita Vestri; Annalisa Pilotto; Gerardo La Monaca; Stefano Di Carlo; Maria Paola Cristalli
Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)       Date:  2011-02-13

2.  Dental Implants - Perceiving Patients' Satisfaction in Relation to Clinical and Electromyography Study on Implant Patients.

Authors:  Mohammad Khursheed Alam; Shaifulizan Abdul Rahman; Shaifulizan Abdul Rahaman; Rehana Basri; Tiffany Tang Sing Yi; Justin Wong Si-Jie; Soumendra Saha
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-14       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of removable and fixed implant-supported prostheses in edentulous jaws: post-loading implant loss.

Authors:  Jaana-Sophia Kern; Thomas Kern; Stefan Wolfart; Nicole Heussen
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2015-02-09       Impact factor: 5.977

Review 4.  Implant Supported Fixed Restorations versus Implant Supported Removable Overdentures: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Khaled Selim; Sherif Ali; Ahmed Reda
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2016-10-14

5.  The Influence of Immediately Loaded Basal Implant Treatment on Patient Satisfaction.

Authors:  Fadia Awadalkreem; Nadia Khalifa; Asim Satti; Ahmed Mohamed Suleiman
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2020-04-14

6.  Satisfaction level in dental-phobic patients with implant-supported rehabilitation performed under general anaesthesia: a prospective study.

Authors:  Louise Sidenö; Rim Hmaidouch; Jan Brandt; Nadine von Krockow; Paul Weigl
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 2.757

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.