STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Implant therapies have increased the range of prosthodontic options for the treatment of edentulism. Considering both dentist- and patient-mediated outcomes, a universal treatment intervention for the treatment of the edentulous mandible has not been demonstrated. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the null hypothesis that there is no single standard of care for the edentulous mandible as defined by a specific treatment modality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A review of the literature was undertaken seeking evidence of a superior intervention for the treatment of the edentulous mandible. A search of the English language peer-reviewed literature was completed using Medline and Google Scholar for the period from 1995 to 2005, focusing on evidence-based research. This was supplemented with a hand search of selected dental journals and textbooks. Longitudinal retrospective studies, longitudinal prospective studies, longitudinal experimental clinical studies, nonrandomized controlled studies, and randomized controlled clinical trials were included for review using a general linear hierarchical classification of studies. Articles that did not focus exclusively on treatment interventions for mandibular edentulism or on the effects of such therapies on the patient were excluded from further evaluation. The search period included articles that were published before the criteria for evidence-based literature were established, but this was not necessarily used to exclude an article. The last search was conducted on September 25, 2005. RESULTS: The literature demonstrates that the functional demands of edentulous patients are highly variable and that patient treatment responses are individual, vary significantly, and are influenced by psychosocial forces. The literature further demonstrates that patient acceptance of specific treatment modalities is modified by social and cultural influences, financial means, and adaptive capacity. Additionally, patient acceptance of a particular treatment modality is influenced by the educational background, knowledge, and experience of the dental health care provider, as well as by a host of other socioeconomic, regional, cultural, age, and gender influences. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this review, there is no evidence for a single, universally superior treatment modality for the edentulous mandible. Better designed, long-term studies are required to further explore differences in patient acceptance to each treatment intervention for the edentulous mandible.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Implant therapies have increased the range of prosthodontic options for the treatment of edentulism. Considering both dentist- and patient-mediated outcomes, a universal treatment intervention for the treatment of the edentulous mandible has not been demonstrated. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the null hypothesis that there is no single standard of care for the edentulous mandible as defined by a specific treatment modality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A review of the literature was undertaken seeking evidence of a superior intervention for the treatment of the edentulous mandible. A search of the English language peer-reviewed literature was completed using Medline and Google Scholar for the period from 1995 to 2005, focusing on evidence-based research. This was supplemented with a hand search of selected dental journals and textbooks. Longitudinal retrospective studies, longitudinal prospective studies, longitudinal experimental clinical studies, nonrandomized controlled studies, and randomized controlled clinical trials were included for review using a general linear hierarchical classification of studies. Articles that did not focus exclusively on treatment interventions for mandibular edentulism or on the effects of such therapies on the patient were excluded from further evaluation. The search period included articles that were published before the criteria for evidence-based literature were established, but this was not necessarily used to exclude an article. The last search was conducted on September 25, 2005. RESULTS: The literature demonstrates that the functional demands of edentulous patients are highly variable and that patient treatment responses are individual, vary significantly, and are influenced by psychosocial forces. The literature further demonstrates that patient acceptance of specific treatment modalities is modified by social and cultural influences, financial means, and adaptive capacity. Additionally, patient acceptance of a particular treatment modality is influenced by the educational background, knowledge, and experience of the dental health care provider, as well as by a host of other socioeconomic, regional, cultural, age, and gender influences. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this review, there is no evidence for a single, universally superior treatment modality for the edentulous mandible. Better designed, long-term studies are required to further explore differences in patient acceptance to each treatment intervention for the edentulous mandible.
Authors: Nicole Passia; Miha Brezavšček; Elfriede Fritzer; Stefanie Kappel; Thomas Kern; Ralph G Luthardt; Nadine Frfr von Maltzahn; Torsten Mundt; Michael Rädel; Axel von Stein-Lausnitz; Matthias Kern Journal: Trials Date: 2014-05-24 Impact factor: 2.279