PURPOSE: The aim of this crossover study was to evaluate patient satisfaction and oral health related-quality of life (OHRQoL) with different connectors used for implant-retained overdentures in subjects with resorbed mandibles. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Eighteen edentulous patients with atrophied mandibular bone received traditional maxillary and mandibular dentures (control). After 3 months, two implants were inserted in the canine regions. Three months later, each patient received the following overdentures using a crossover design: (1) bar overdentures, (2) telescopic overdentures, and (3) stud overdentures. Patient satisfaction (primary outcome) was measured by visual analog scale (VAS). OHRQoL (secondary outcome) was measured by oral health impact profile (OHIP-14). Questions of VAS and OHIP-14 were evaluated after 3 months of using conventional dentures, bar overdentures, telescopic overdentures, and stud overdentures. RESULTS: For all questionnaires, conventional dentures recorded significantly lower satisfaction than implant overdentures. Stud overdentures showed significantly higher satisfaction with maxillary denture comfort, self-consciousness, and feeling that the prosthesis is a part of the patient compared with other attachments. Bar and telescopic overdentures showed higher satisfaction during biting of hard and soft foods, while telescopic and stud overdentures showed higher satisfaction with oral hygiene. No significant differences between attachments regarding other VAS and OHIP-14 questions were noted. CONCLUSION:Implant overdentures for subjects with mandibular bone resorption improved patient satisfaction and OHRQoL compared with traditional dentures regardless of the form of attachments. However, studs are more advantageous in terms of comfort with maxillary overdentures, self-consciousness, and feeling that the prosthesis is a part of the patient. Bar and telescopic attachments had more satisfaction during biting of soft and hard foods, while telescopic and stud attachments had more satisfaction with oral hygiene.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The aim of this crossover study was to evaluate patient satisfaction and oral health related-quality of life (OHRQoL) with different connectors used for implant-retained overdentures in subjects with resorbed mandibles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen edentulouspatients with atrophied mandibular bone received traditional maxillary and mandibular dentures (control). After 3 months, two implants were inserted in the canine regions. Three months later, each patient received the following overdentures using a crossover design: (1) bar overdentures, (2) telescopic overdentures, and (3) stud overdentures. Patient satisfaction (primary outcome) was measured by visual analog scale (VAS). OHRQoL (secondary outcome) was measured by oral health impact profile (OHIP-14). Questions of VAS and OHIP-14 were evaluated after 3 months of using conventional dentures, bar overdentures, telescopic overdentures, and stud overdentures. RESULTS: For all questionnaires, conventional dentures recorded significantly lower satisfaction than implant overdentures. Stud overdentures showed significantly higher satisfaction with maxillary denture comfort, self-consciousness, and feeling that the prosthesis is a part of the patient compared with other attachments. Bar and telescopic overdentures showed higher satisfaction during biting of hard and soft foods, while telescopic and stud overdentures showed higher satisfaction with oral hygiene. No significant differences between attachments regarding other VAS and OHIP-14 questions were noted. CONCLUSION: Implant overdentures for subjects with mandibular bone resorption improved patient satisfaction and OHRQoL compared with traditional dentures regardless of the form of attachments. However, studs are more advantageous in terms of comfort with maxillary overdentures, self-consciousness, and feeling that the prosthesis is a part of the patient. Bar and telescopic attachments had more satisfaction during biting of soft and hard foods, while telescopic and stud attachments had more satisfaction with oral hygiene.
Authors: Cleber Davi Del Rei Daltro Rosa; Rafaella de Souza Leão; Cátia Maria Fonseca Guerra; Eduardo Piza Pellizzer; Bruno Gustavo da Silva Casado; Sandra Lúcia Dantas de Moraes Journal: Saudi Dent J Date: 2021-03-14