A longitudinal study of quality of life outcomes in older adults requesting implant prostheses and complete removable dentures

A longitudinal clinical trial involving 103 subjects was undertaken to assess the impact of oral implant therapy on the psychosocial well-being of subjects with complete denture wearing problems. There were four experimental groups: (1) an implant group, where subjects were edentulous/edentate in one jaw and requested and received implants to retain an oral prosthesis (IG); (2) subjects edentulous/edentate in one jaw requesting implants but who received conventional dentures (CDG1); (3) edentulous subjects requesting replacement of their dentures by conventional means (CDG2); (4) dentate subjects requiring routine treatment, who were included for comparison. Data were collected in each group pre- and post-treatment using validated oral specific [the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)], and generic (the SF36) health status measures. Subjects in IG, CDG1 and CDG2 also completed a denture satisfaction scale. IG and CDG1 subjects reported that tooth loss and denture wearing problems had a much greater impact on their quality of life than subjects seeking conventional dentures. Dentate subjects had a much better oral health status compared with denture-wearing subjects. Following treatment, subjects who received implant-retained prostheses (IG) reported a significant improvement in satisfaction and health-related quality of life, as did subjects who requested and received conventional dentures (CDG2). Subjects who requested implants, but received conventional dentures (CDG1), reported little improvement in denture satisfaction and only modest improvement in their quality of life. None of the denture-wearing subjects reported health-related quality of life that was as good as that of dentate subjects. The findings have significant implications in the assessment of outcomes in future clinical trials.     

An assessment of sensitivity to change of the Oral Health Impact Profile in a clinical trial

Patient-based assessment of oral health outcomes is of growing interest. Measurement of change following clinical intervention is a key property of a health status measure. To date, most of the research on oral health status measurement has focused on construct and discriminant validity of health status measures. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess sensitivity to change of an oral-specific health status measure, the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP). METHODS: Study subjects were in three groups, namely, edentulous/edentate subjects who requested and received complete implant stabilised oral prostheses (IG, n=26), edentulous/edentate subjects who requested implants but received conventional dentures (CDG1, n=22), and edentulous subjects who had new conventional complete dentures (CDG2, n=35). Data were collected pre- and post-operatively using the OHIP and a validated denture satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: All subjects reported similar low levels of denture satisfaction pre-operatively. Denture problems had a more significant impact on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQL) for implant seekers (IG and CDG1 subjects) than subjects seeking conventional dentures (CDG2). Following treatment, significant improvement in satisfaction with oral prostheses and OHRQL was reported by IG and CDG2 subjects; the level of improvement was more moderate for CDG1 subjects. OHIP change scores were correlated with denture satisfaction change scores. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that sensitivity to change of the OHIP was good. This property was not improved by using statement weights.     

A patient-based assessment of implant-stabilized and conventional complete dentures

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Outcomes of oral implant therapy have been described primarily in terms of implant survival rates and the durability of implant superstructures. Reports of patient-based outcomes of implant therapy have been sparse, and none of these studies have used oral-specific health status measures. PURPOSE: This study assessed the impact of implant-stabilized prostheses on the health status of complete denture wearers using patient-based, oral-specific health status measures. It also assessed the influence of preoperative expectations on outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three experimental groups requesting replacement of their conventional complete dentures completed an Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) and a validated denture satisfaction scale before treatment. One group received an implant-stabilized prosthesis (IG), and 2 groups received new conventional complete dentures (CDG1 and CDG2). After treatment, all subjects completed the health status measures again; preoperative data were compared with postoperative data. RESULTS: Before treatment, satisfaction with complete dentures was low in all 3 groups. Subjects requesting implants (IG and CDG1) had high expectations for implant-stabilized prostheses. Improvement in denture satisfaction and OHIP scores was reported by all 3 groups after treatment. Subjects who received their preferred treatment (IG and CDG2 subjects) reported a much greater improvement than CDG1 subjects. Preoperative expectation levels did not appear to influence satisfaction with the outcomes of implant therapy in IG subjects. CONCLUSION: Subjects who received implants (IG) that replaced conventional complete dentures reported significant improvement after treatment, as did subjects who requested conventional replacement dentures (CDG2). The OHIP appears useful in identifying patients likely to benefit from implant-stabilized prostheses.     

Patient expectations of oral implant-retained prostheses in a UK dental hospital

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The loss of the natural dentition leads to severe functional impairment in many edentulous adults. A prosthesis retained and supported by osseointegrated dental implants may provide a satisfactory solution for people who have lost all their natural teeth. However, little information is available as to what patients requesting implants expect of implant-retained prostheses. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the expectations of a group of edentulous patients requesting implant therapy. METHOD: The study included two groups: (1) a group of edentulous adults who requested implant therapy ('implant group'); and (2) an edentulous control group, of similar age and gender distribution as the implant group, receiving conventional complete dentures. Following a clinical and radiographic examination of the patients, data were collected using validated questionnaires. Both groups made a subjective assessment of current dentures. The implant group also completed a questionnaire which assessed expectations of implant-retained prostheses. RESULTS: Baseline satisfaction with current dentures was low in both groups, with the implant group being significantly less satisfied with comfort and stability of their mandibular dentures. Perceived ability of the implant group to chew hard foods was less than the control group. The implant group's expectations of an implant-retained prosthesis were significantly greater than for a conventional denture. CONCLUSION: Careful assessment of patient expectation of implant therapy is essential to determine appropriate treatment need, and to highlight unrealistic expectations.     

A randomized-controlled trial of food choices made by edentulous adults

Aim: The aim of this study was to conduct a randomized‐controlled trial to compare food choices of edentulous adults provided with implant‐supported mandibular overdentures and conventional dentures. Methods: Edentulous patients were randomly allocated to an implant group (IG) or a denture group (DG). IG subjects (n=49) were provided with conventional maxillary dentures and implant‐retained mandibular overdentures. Subjects in this group refusing implants were retained using the ‘intention‐to‐treat principle’ and provided with conventional dentures. DG subjects (n=48) were provided with conventional dentures. Subjects indicated whether they consumed any of seven test foods and the level of chewing difficulty experienced. Data were collected pre‐treatment and 3 months post treatment. Results: IG subjects reported increased consumption of carrots, apples and nuts post‐treatment (P<0.05) and decreased post‐treatment difficulty in chewing apples and nuts. DG subjects reported decreased post‐treatment difficulty in chewing carrots, bacon and nuts (P<0.05). Between group differences for chewing difficulty were detected for nuts that DG subjects found easier to chew than IG subjects (P=0.002). Conclusion: Food selection and perceived chewing difficulty improved in both groups, with no significant differences between groups. Successful rehabilitation may not result in different food selection, which may require concurrent tailored dietary interventions, but may increase available food choices.     

Comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures and conventional dentures among middle-aged edentulous patients: satisfaction and functional assessment

PURPOSE: The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the relative efficacy of mandibular overdentures retained by only two implants and a bar attachment with conventional dentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Edentulous adults, aged 35 to 65 years, were randomly assigned to two groups that received either a mandibular conventional denture (n = 48) or an overdenture supported by two endosseous implants with a connecting bar (n = 54). All subjects rated their general satisfaction and other features of their original dentures and their new prostheses (comfort, stability, ability to chew, speech, esthetics, and cleaning ability) on 100-mm visual analogue scales prior to treatment and 2 months postdelivery. Oral health-related quality of life was also evaluated pre- and posttreatment. RESULTS: Multiple regression analysis revealed that the mean general satisfaction was significantly higher in the overdenture group than in the conventional denture group (P = .0001). Age, gender, marital status, and income were not significantly associated with ratings of general satisfaction. Furthermore, the implant group gave significantly higher ratings on three additional measures of the prostheses (comfort, stability, and ease of chewing; P < .05). CONCLUSION: A mandibular two-implant overdenture opposed by a maxillary conventional denture is a more satisfactory treatment than conventional dentures for edentulous middle-aged adults.     

The effectiveness of 2‐implant overdentures – a pragmatic international multicentre study

Summary The purpose of this multicentre observational study was to determine patient satisfaction with either conventional dentures or mandibular 2‐implant overdentures in a ‘real world’ setting. Two hundred and three edentulous patients (mean age 68·8 ± 10·4 years) were recruited at eight centres located in North America, South America and Europe. The patients were provided with new mandibular conventional dentures or implant overdentures supported by two implants and ball attachments. At baseline and at 6 months post‐treatment, they rated their satisfaction with their mandibular prostheses on 100‐mm visual analogue scale questionnaires. One hundred and two (50·2%) participants had valid baseline and 6‐month satisfaction data. Although both groups reported improvements, the implant overdenture group reported significantly higher ratings of overall satisfaction, comfort, stability, ability to speak and ability to chew. These results suggest that edentulous patients who choose mandibular implant overdentures have significantly greater improvements in satisfaction, despite their relatively higher cost, than those who choose new conventional dentures.     

Patient satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures 6 months after delivery

PURPOSE: This study examined patient satisfaction with conventional complete dentures and mandibular implant overdentures opposing conventional maxillary dentures 6 months after delivery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty edentulous subjects (aged 65 to 75 years) were randomly assigned to either a mandibular conventional denture or an overdenture supported by two implants with ball-shaped retentive anchors. Patients rated their general satisfaction and other features of their prostheses, together with their ability to eat certain food items, on 100-mm visual analogue scales before assignment, and after 2 and 6 months. RESULTS: Both treatment groups reported greater satisfaction with their new prostheses at 6 months. General satisfaction ratings were higher in the implant group than in the conventional denture group by approximately 36% (mean difference 22.3 mm). The implant group also rated comfort (mean difference 22.4 mm), stability (mean difference 28.5 mm), and ability to chew (mean difference 17.3 mm) significantly higher. Significantly higher scores were also given by the implant group for their ability to chew certain hard foods. A trend for an increase in the differences between the groups, in favor of the implant group, was observed between the 2- and 6-month recalls, although the increase was only significant for ease of cleaning. The primary influence on general satisfaction 6 months after the delivery of the prostheses was the provision of the two-implant overdenture. CONCLUSION: Edentulous seniors who received mandibular implant overdentures opposing a conventional denture rated their general satisfaction approximately 36% higher than did a comparable group provided with new conventional dentures.     

Relationship between prosthodontic evaluation and patient ratings of mandibular conventional and implant prostheses

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare clinicians' ratings of the state of oral tissues and their satisfaction with treatment to edentulous patients' ratings of treatment success after provision of mandibular implant overdentures or conventional dentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty subjects randomly received either mandibular overdentures retained by two implants (n = 30) or new conventional mandibular complete dentures (n = 30). All were given new conventional maxillary dentures. Baseline measures included clinical evaluation of the oral soft and hard tissues. Patients rated their general satisfaction before and after treatment, as well as their satisfaction with stability, speech, and esthetics on visual analogue scales. The treating prosthodontist rated the dentures for the same categories. Patient and clinician ratings were compared using correlations, t tests, and linear regression. RESULTS: None of the clinical variables were significantly correlated with patient satisfaction before or after treatment. The prosthodontist rated mandibular implant overdentures significantly better than conventional dentures regarding general satisfaction, stability, speech, and esthetics. Implant overdentures were also easier to fabricate (P < .0001). The prosthodontists' scores were not significantly correlated with patient scores for any question. CONCLUSION: Clinicians' assessments of the quality of denture-supporting tissues are poor predictors of patient satisfaction with mandibular implant or conventional prostheses. Prosthodontists and patients both rate mandibular implant overdentures as significantly superior to conventional dentures, but patients and clinicians do not usually agree when evaluating individual prostheses.     

Patient satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures 6 months after delivery

Purpose

This study examined patient satisfaction with conventional complete dentures and mandibular implant overdentures opposing conventional maxillary dentures 6 months after delivery.

Materials and Methods

Sixty edentulous subjects (aged 65 to 75 years) were randomly assigned to either a mandibular conventional denture or an overdenture supported by two implants with ball-shaped retentive anchors. Patients rated their general satisfaction and other features of their prostheses, together with their ability to eat certain food items, on 100-mm visual analogue scales before assignment, and after 2 and 6 months.

Results

Both treatment groups reported greater satisfaction with their new prostheses at 6 months. General satisfaction ratings were higher in the implant group than in the conventional denture group by approximately 36% (mean difference 22.3 mm). The implant group also rated comfort (mean difference 22.4 mm), stability (mean difference 28.5 mm), and ability to chew (mean difference 17.3 mm) significantly higher. Significantly higher scores were also given by the implant group for their ability to chew certain hard foods. A trend for an increase in the differences between the groups, in favor of the implant group, was observed between the 2- and 6-month recalls, although the increase was only significant for ease of cleaning. The primary influence on general satisfaction 6 months after the delivery of the prostheses was the provision of the two-implant overdenture.

Conclusion

Edentulous seniors who received mandibular implant overdentures opposing a conventional denture rated their general satisfaction approximately 36% higher than did a comparable group provided with new conventional dentures.     

Choosing or refusing oral implants: a prospective study of edentulous volunteers for a clinical trial

PURPOSE: Little is known about why people accept or refuse oral implant treatment. The purpose of this study was to assess edentulous subjects' acceptance or refusal of free implants to retain mandibular dentures, and to evaluate factors that might predict those who are more likely to choose implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred one volunteers completed questionnaires about their background, satisfaction with conventional dentures, oral health-related quality of life, and preference for implants. Results were analyzed using Pearson chi-square tests and logistic regression. RESULTS: While 79% of volunteers accepted and 21% refused an initial offer of free implants, a number of them changed their minds, leaving 64% who wanted implants and 36% who did not want them. The most common reason for choosing implants was anticipation of improved mandibular denture stability or security (73%), while the most common reason for refusal was concern about surgical risks (43%). A logistic regression model identifying those who complained of poor chewing function, poor speech, pain, and dissatisfaction with appearance improved the prediction of those who wanted implants from 64% to 80%. CONCLUSION: When cost was removed as a factor, more than one third (36%) of the older, edentulous participants in this study ultimately refused an offer of free implants to retain their mandibular dentures. Poor chewing function, poor speech, pain, and dissatisfaction with appearance were the most important factors in predicting who would choose implants.     

Within-subject comparison of maxillary long-bar implant-retained prostheses with and without palatal coverage: patient-based outcomes

Although maxillary implant overdentures are used in oral rehabilitation, different designs have not been compared previously in clinical trials. This crossover trial was designed to measure differences in patient satisfaction with maxillary long-bar implant overdentures with and without palatal coverage opposed by a fixed mandibular implant-supported prosthesis. Data were also gathered on new conventional dentures and on maxillary conventional dentures opposed by mandibular fixed prostheses. Sixteen participants were selected from a population wearing conventional dentures. Fifteen received new upper and lower dentures (1 drop-out). Four implants were placed in the maxilla and mandible (2 drop-outs). A mandibular fixed prosthesis was inserted in 13 participants, who were then divided into 2 groups. One group (n = 7) received long-bar overdentures with palate, then long-bar overdentures without palate. The other group (n = 6) received the same treatments in the reverse order. Mastication tests and psychometric evaluations using Visual Analog Scales and Categorical Scales were performed throughout the study. General satisfaction was very high with both maxillary implant-supported prostheses, as were ratings of almost all psychosocial and functional variables. There were no significant differences between treatments, suggesting that patients are equally satisfied with long-bar overdentures with and without palate when these are opposed by mandibular fixed prostheses. However, the ratings given to the maxillary implant prostheses were not significantly higher than for new conventional maxillary prostheses. This suggests that maxillary implant prostheses should not be considered as a general treatment of choice in patients with good bony support for maxillary conventional prostheses.     

Comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures and conventional dentures among middle-aged edentulous patients: Satisfaction and functional assessment : Manal A. Awad, James P. Lund, Eric Dufresne, Jocelyne S. Feine. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:117-122

Purpose

The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the relative efficacy of mandibular overdentures retained by only two implants and a bar attachment with conventional dentures.

Materials and methods

Edentulous adults, aged 35 to 65 years, were randomly assigned to two groups that received either a mandibular conventional denture (n = 48) or an overdenture supported by two endosseous implants with a connecting bar (n = 54). All subjects rated their general satisfaction and other features of their original dentures and their new prostheses (comfort, stability, ability to chew, speech, esthetics, and cleaning ability) on 100-mm visual analogue scales prior to treatment and 2 months postdelivery. Oral health-related quality of life was also evaluated pre- and posttreatment.

Results

Multiple regression analysis revealed that the mean general satisfaction was significantly higher in the overdenture group than in the conventional denture group (P=.0001). Age, gender, marital status, and income were not significantly associated with ratings of general satisfaction. Furthermore, the implant group gave significantly higher ratings on three additional measures of the prostheses (comfort, stability, and ease of chewing; P<.05).

Conclusion

A mandibular two-implant overdenture opposed by a maxillary conventional denture is a more satisfactory treatment than conventional dentures for edentulous middle-aged adults.     

Psychologic response of the edentulous patient after primary surgery for oral cancer: A cross-sectional study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Edentulous patients can have difficulty in tolerating dentures and this may lead to psychologic disturbance. The problem is potentially more severe for edentulous patients after primary surgery for oral cancer, where treatment can include composite resection and reconstruction, followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. PURPOSE: This study investigated the psychologic response and oral satisfaction of edentulous patients treated by surgery for oral squamous cell carcinoma, and to make a comparison to edentulous noncancer counterparts. METHODS AND MATERIAL: The cross-sectional study included patients who were alive and disease-free 2 to 3 years after primary surgery. Seventy patients underwent surgery at the Regional Maxillofacial Unit, Liverpool, in 1993 and 1994. Twenty-eight patients were disease-free; 26 completed questionnaires that included a general health questionnaire (GHQ), a body satisfaction scale, a self-esteem scale, an oral symptom checklist, and a denture satisfaction questionnaire. Comparison was made with 98 noncancer edentulous patients from the same unit. RESULTS: There were similarities in psychologic and oral satisfaction scores between the noncancer and cancer edentulous patients. Cancer patients reported lower self-esteem (P <.02). Cancer patients who were not rehabilitated with either conventional or implant-retained prostheses had significant psychologic morbidity as measured by the GHQ, self-esteem, and body satisfaction scales. Cancer patients with implant-retained overdentures reported greater satisfaction with their dentures compared with their counterparts who wore conventional dentures (P <.05). CONCLUSION: Edentulous cancer patients who do not achieve oral rehabilitation after surgery for oral cancer exhibited significant psychologic morbidity. Patients with implant-retained overdentures exhibited a tendency to adopt the same psychologic response with improved denture satisfaction as edentulous patients with conventional dentures, despite the former having more extensive disease that would otherwise make the provision of dentures much more difficult if implants were not used.     

Implant anchored complete mandibular denture: evaluation of masticatory efficiency, oral function and degree of satisfaction

Masticatory efficiency, oral function and degree of satisfaction with the treatment received were analysed in a group of fully edentulous patients with severe atrophy of the mandibular bone, rehabilitated with complete removable dentures, before and after anchoring the dentures to osseointegrated implants. Masticatory efficiency increased significantly and chewing cycles increased in amplitude after anchoring the denture. The component of the chewing cycle that most influenced the increase in functional area was the lateral one. A correlation was found between the increase in the lateral component of the chewing cycle and the increased masticatory efficiency achieved with implant‐anchored dentures. The degree of satisfaction with their rehabilitation reported by the subjects was correlated neither to increased masticatory efficiency nor to improved oral function.     

AICRG, Part IV: Patient satisfaction reported for Ankylos implant prostheses

PROBLEM: Although many maxillary dentures exhibit sufficient retention and stability for patients to adapt well to them, mandibular dentures present a major challenge. The introduction of the endosseous dental implant provided the opportunity for the patient to have esthetic replacements (implant prostheses) that were retentive and stable for all missing natural teeth. METHOD: This paper reports on the satisfaction of over 470 patients with implant prostheses fabricated using a new and innovative implant design (Ankylos, Dentsply-Friadent, Mannheim, Germany). RESULTS: A total of 1500 Ankylos implants were placed, restored, and followed for 3 to 5 years. Patients were asked to respond to a series of questions related to their satisfaction with their new replacements for missing natural teeth. A total of 95.6% of the patients rated chewing ability with Ankylos prosthesis as excellent to good; 92.2% indicated a significant improvement in their ability to chew; 92.6% reported overall clinical function much better than conventional dentures; 99.1% indicated that speech had improved or was not changed; 96.3% indicated hot and cold foods tasted better; 98.8% indicated no pain or discomfort during clinical function; 99.4% liked their new implant prosthesis; 98.0% would seek implant-prostheses treatment again, if necessary; 99.1% would recommend implant prostheses to friends and relatives; and 98.8% indicated the advantages of Ankylos prostheses far exceeded any disadvantages that may exist. CONCLUSIONS: Patients indicated that they (1) were highly satisfied with the final results of the replacements for their natural teeth that were retained or supported by this new implant design, (2) would not hesitate to recommend this form of treatment to their friends and relatives, and (3) would not hesitate to seek the same treatment again if necessary in the future.     

Oral health status and treatment satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures: a randomized clinical trial in a senior population

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare elderly patients' satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life with mandibular two-implant overdentures and conventional dentures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty edentulous subjects aged 65 to 75 years were randomly assigned to two groups treated with maxillary conventional dentures and either a mandibular conventional denture (n = 30) or an overdenture supported by two implants with ball retainers (n = 30). Subjects rated their general satisfaction, as well as other features of their dentures (comfort, stability, ability to chew, speech, esthetics, and cleaning ability), prior to treatment and 2 months postdelivery. Changes in ratings on the original Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) and its short form (OHIP-EDENT) were also used as indicators of oral health-related quality of life. RESULTS: The primary outcome of this study, ratings of general satisfaction 2 months postdelivery, was significantly better in the group treated with mandibular two-implant overdentures (P = .001). In addition, the implant group gave significantly higher ratings on comfort, stability, and ability to chew. Furthermore, using OHIP-EDENT, subjects who received mandibular two-implant overdentures had significantly fewer oral health-related quality of life problems than did the conventional group. CONCLUSION: These short-term results suggest that mandibular two-implant overdentures combined with maxillary conventional dentures provide better function and oral health-related quality of life than conventional dentures.     

Implant retained or conventional dentures, which give more patients satisfaction?

DESIGN: This was a randomised controlled trial (RCT) set in a dental hospital. INTERVENTION: The implant group (IG) had two implants placed in the interforaminal region of the lower jaw followed (after healing) by a denture fixed to the implants by a ball attachment mechanism. In the conventional dentures group (CG), dentures were constructed using conventional replacement denture techniques. Patients in the IG had conventional upper dentures made in the same fashion. OUTCOME MEASURE: The performance of the dentures was evaluated using an oral health impact profile (OHIP) and a denture satisfaction scale before treatment and 3 months post-treatment. RESULTS: Analysis was conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Substantial improvements in oral-health-related quality of life and denture satisfaction were reported by both groups. There were, however, no significant differences post-treatment between the groups. Patients randomised to the IG who declined implants had significantly lower pretreatment OHIP scores and there were significantly greater pre-/ post-treatment change-scores for individuals who had implants compared with the change-scores of people who declined. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant post-treatment differences between the groups, but a treatment effect may be masked by the intention-to-treat analysis. The pre-/ post-treatment OHIP change-scores were significantly greater for people receiving implants than for those who refused.     

Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures

Implant overdentures and conventional prostheses have been compared in several trials using a variety of functional and oral health-related quality of life (OHQOL) outcomes. In this paper, we describe the impact of implant overdentures on general and OHQOL in seniors. OBJECTIVES: To compare the oral health-related and general quality of life of seniors (aged 65-75 years) who received either mandibular implant overdentures or conventional dentures. METHODS: Sixty edentulous patients were recruited. Thirty received mandibular overdentures retained by two implants (IOD) and a conventional maxillary denture, the other 30 subjects received new maxillary and mandibular conventional complete dentures (CD). All completed the 20-item version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-20) before treatment, then at two and 6 months after delivery of the dentures. The SF-36 general health questionnaire was completed at baseline and 6 months only. RESULTS: Pretreatment and 6-month data from 55 subjects were analyzed. Those who received the IODs had significantly better OHIP-20 total scores at 6 months. Results for IOD subjects were also superior in the functional limitation, physical pain, physical disability and psychological disability subscales. While no significant between group difference was found on the SF-36 health survey, significant pre-post-treatment differences within the IOD group were detected for the role emotional, vitality and the social function scales. CONCLUSIONS: Mandibular overdentures retained by two implants provide elderly patients with better OHQOL. General health-related quality of life improved in the implant group.