OBJECTIVE: One aim of this prospective clinical study was to measure the effects of strategicimplant placement under removable partial dental prostheses (RPDPs) and among removable complete dental prostheses (RCDPs) on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients participated in this study restored with RCDPs (n = 12) or RPDPs retained by telescopic crowns with 1-2 abutment teeth (n = 11). The total number of abutments was increased to 5-6 (maxilla) or to 4 (mandible) by placing implants in strategically advantageous regions. Ball attachments were attached to the implants and integrated in the existing denture. The Oral Health Impact Profile (49 questions) was completed by patients before implant placement, at baseline (integration of ball attachments), and during 12- and 24-month follow-up visits. RESULTS: There were marked reductions of impacts in both groups when comparing pre-treatment scores and scores at baseline (P < 0.0001), 12-month (P < 0.0001), and 24-month follow-up visits (P < 0.0001), respectively. For none of the visits, a significant difference between the two groups was detected (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that a strategic placement of implants under the existing dental prostheses improves OHRQoL in both treatment groups.
OBJECTIVE: One aim of this prospective clinical study was to measure the effects of strategicimplant placement under removable partial dental prostheses (RPDPs) and among removable complete dental prostheses (RCDPs) on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients participated in this study restored with RCDPs (n = 12) or RPDPs retained by telescopic crowns with 1-2 abutment teeth (n = 11). The total number of abutments was increased to 5-6 (maxilla) or to 4 (mandible) by placing implants in strategically advantageous regions. Ball attachments were attached to the implants and integrated in the existing denture. The Oral Health Impact Profile (49 questions) was completed by patients before implant placement, at baseline (integration of ball attachments), and during 12- and 24-month follow-up visits. RESULTS: There were marked reductions of impacts in both groups when comparing pre-treatment scores and scores at baseline (P < 0.0001), 12-month (P < 0.0001), and 24-month follow-up visits (P < 0.0001), respectively. For none of the visits, a significant difference between the two groups was detected (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that a strategic placement of implants under the existing dental prostheses improves OHRQoL in both treatment groups.
Authors: Franz Sebastian Schwindling; Ulrich Karl Deisenhofer; Anne-Christiane Séché; Franziska Lehmann; Peter Rammelsberg; Thomas Stober Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 3.573