The impact of dietary advice on edentulous adults' denture satisfaction and oral health‐related quality of life 6 months after intervention

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the impact of customised dietary advice on patients' satisfaction with their dentures and oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) in patients wearing implant‐supported mandibular overdentures (IOD) or conventional dentures (CD). Materials and methods: In this prospective cohort study, 28 IOD (two implant‐retained mandibular overdenture) and 26 CD patients completed a denture satisfaction scale and the 20‐item oral health impact profile (OHIP‐20) before and 6 months following provision of customised dietary advice. Results: At 6 months following provision of individualised dietary advice, the IOD group showed significantly greater satisfaction than the conventional group for denture comfort (80.6, ± 15.6, vs. 68.7 ± 15.6 P=0.001), stability (75.8 ± 15.9 vs. 59.5 ± 30.4, P=0.002), and perceived chewing ability (79 ± 30.4 vs. 59.5 ± 30.4, P=0.027) ± when adjusted for baseline scores. Before delivery of the dietary advice there were no significant differences between groups for Satisfaction or OHIP scores. No difference in OHRQoL was seen between groups. Conclusions: The delivery of customised dietary advice to edentulous patients impacts differently on their satisfaction with denture comfort, stability and chewing ability depending on the nature of their prosthesis. This re‐evaluation of satisfaction occurs when edentulous patients challenge themselves to consume more fruits, vegetables and fibre‐rich foods. The IOD group reported an increased level of satisfaction and perceived chewing ability whereas it appeared that CD wearers may have had their awareness of the shortcomings of this sort of prosthesis reawakened. To cite this article:
Ellis JS, Elfeky AF, Moynihan PJ, Seal C, Hyland RM, Thomason M. The impact of dietary advice on edentulous adults' denture satisfaction and oral health‐related quality of life 6 months after intervention.
Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 21 , 2010; 386–391.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600‐0501.2009.01859.x     

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.     

Sex differences in denture satisfaction

OBJECTIVES: Males and females differ in their responses to many health conditions and treatments. The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to determine whether there are differences in the way that male and female edentulous elders rate their satisfaction with new mandibular implant overdentures (IODs) and conventional dentures (CDs), at 6 and 12 months following delivery. METHODS: Edentulous elders (n=256) were randomly assigned to receive maxillary conventional dentures and either mandibular overdentures supported by two implants with ball attachments or conventional dentures. Participants rated their general satisfaction, as well as other features of their dentures (comfort, stability, ability to chew, aesthetics, etc.) prior to treatment and 6 and 12 months after delivery. RESULTS: Ratings of satisfaction with IODs were significantly higher than with CDs. Six months after delivery, females in the CD group rated their general satisfaction and satisfaction with ability to chew and aesthetics significantly lower than did the males. The sex differences in the CD group remained at 12 months after delivery. However, males and females in the IOD group rated their general satisfaction and all six subcategories equally. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly females are less satisfied with conventional dentures than elderly males with regards to aesthetics and ability to chew, but equally satisfied with implant overdentures. At 6 and 12 months after delivery, elderly edentulous males and females wearing mandibular implant overdentures were significantly more satisfied than those wearing 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.     

Mandibular complete denture versus single‐implant overdenture: a systematic review of patient‐reported outcomes

The single‐implant mandibular overdenture (SIMO) has been proposed as an alternative for edentulous patients who are poorly adapted to their dentures due to low retention and stability of the conventional mandibular complete denture (CD). However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of SIMO, which can be measured by examining patient perception of treatment effects. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the comparative results of CD and SIMO treatments using patient‐reported outcome measures. A literature search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Central databases. The search included studies published up to July 2017. The focus question was: ‘Do single‐implant mandibular overdentures improve patient‐reported outcomes compared to conventional complete dentures in edentulous patients?’ Eligible studies were randomised clinical trials (RCT) and prospective studies. After initial screening for eligibility and full‐text analysis, 11 studies were included for data extraction and quality assessment (five parallel‐group RCTs, two crossover RCTs and four prospective studies). All studies reported marked improvement in satisfaction with the dentures and quality of life measures after SIMO treatment, irrespective of variations in implant treatment protocols and retention systems. Methodological considerations revealed a lack of evidence from RCTs on the comparative effectiveness of the two treatment strategies. Hence, although available evidence suggests considerable improvement in patient‐reported outcomes following the insertion of a single implant to retain a mandibular denture, further well‐designed comparative studies between SIMO and CD are required to improve the level of evidence and to support the indication of SIMO treatment in routine practice.     

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.     

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.     

Implant-retained mandibular overdentures versus conventional dentures: 10 years of care and aftercare

PURPOSE: This 10-year prospective, randomized, clinical trial investigated the treatment outcome of edentulous patients treated with mandibular overdentures retained by 2 endosseous implants compared with conventional dentures in patients with or without vestibuloplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred fifty-one edentulous patients (5 groups) with a symphyseal mandibular bone height between 8 and 25 mm participated. Sixty-two patients were treated with an overdenture retained by 2 implants (groups 1 and 3), 59 patients were treated with a conventional denture (groups 2 and 5), and 30 patients were treated with a conventional denture after preprosthetic vestibuloplasty (group 4). Patients who received conventional dentures but preferred implants later on could undergo implant surgery after 1 year of their initial treatment, but were analyzed in their original group. The prosthetic and surgical care and aftercare were scored during a 10-year evaluation period. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three patients completed the 10-year follow-up evaluations. Forty-four percent of patients treated with conventional dentures switched within 10 years to implant-retained overdentures, versus 16% of the patients who were treated with conventional dentures after vestibuloplasty. On average, a greater time investment and more treatment sessions were needed in patients treated with implant-retained overdentures compared to patients treated with conventional dentures. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with an implant-retained overdenture need more treatment interventions and treatment time than patients treated with conventional dentures.     

Marginal bone resorption around immediate and delayed loaded implants supporting a locator‐retained mandibular overdenture. A 1‐year randomised controlled trial

The aim of this 1‐year study was to evaluate and compare crestal bone loss and clinical outcomes of immediate and delayed loaded implants supporting mandibular overdentures with Locator attachments. In a randomised controlled clinical trial, 36 completely edentulous patients (mean age 59·6 years) who desired to improve the stability of their mandibular dentures were randomly assigned into two groups. Each patient received two implants in the canine area of the mandible after a minimal flap reflection. Implants were loaded by mandibular overdentures either 3 months (delayed loading group, G1) or the same day (immediate loading group, G2) after implant placement. Locator attachments were used to retain all overdentures to the implants. Peri‐implant vertical (VBL) and horizontal (HBLO) bone losses and clinical parameters [plaque scores (PI), gingival scores (GI), probing depths (PD) and implant stability (ISQ)] were assessed at time of overdenture insertion (T0), 6 months (T6) and 12 months (T12) after overdenture insertion. After 12 months of overdenture insertion, two implants (5·5%) failed in G2. Vertical bone loss was significantly higher in G2 compared with G1, while HBLO demonstrated insignificant differences between groups. All clinical parameters (PI, GI, PD and ISQ) did not differ significantly between groups. Vertical bone loss was significantly correlated with PD and HBLO. Immediately loaded two implants supporting a Locator‐retained mandibular overdenture are associated with more vertical bone resorption when compared to delayed loaded implants after 1 year. Clinical outcomes do not differ significantly between loading protocols.     

Patients' evaluation of two occlusal schemes for implant overdentures

Background: There is an absence of conclusive evidence for occlusal schemes in implant overdentures. Purpose: To investigate the consequences of two different occlusal schemes on levels of satisfaction for patients wearing implant overdentures. Materials and Methods: Within an existing randomized controlled clinical trial, a physiologic occlusal scheme was compared with a lingualized occlusal scheme for 18 selected participants all with implant overdentures. Nine participants had conventional maxillary complete dentures opposing mandibular 2‐implant overdentures; a further nine participants had maxillary 3‐implant overdentures opposing mandibular 2‐implant overdentures. All participants recruited had been wearing their original prostheses for 3 years with a bilateral balance occlusal scheme. The participants' existing satisfaction levels, as a baseline, were determined using visual analogue scale questionnaires. They were followed by similar assessments of two further occlusal schemes using 2‐month assessment periods. On completion of the study, the participants selected their preferred occlusal scheme and semiformal interviews were conducted to assess the rationale for their choices. Results: Baseline data showed all the participants had pre‐existing high satisfaction levels. Thereafter, of those participants that received lingualized occlusion first, 55.6% reported that the physiologic occlusion was better than lingualized occlusion. For those participants who received the physiologic occlusion first, 85.7% reported that physiologic occlusion was better than lingualized occlusion. On completion of the study, 64.7% of the participants preferred the physiologic occlusion, 35.3% preferred the lingualized occlusion. However, when the two groups' satisfaction scores were modeled using the three main key indicator questions (general satisfaction, general ability to chew, or general function), there were no significant differences between them. Conclusions: Within the limitations of a small number of participants, the majority of them still indicated a preference for a physiologic occlusion for implant overdentures. Improved function was given as the main indicator for that preference. Having implant overdentures in one or both jaws is not a formative factor in patient's opinions on occlusal schemes.     

One-Year Prospective Evaluation of the Early Loading of Unsplinted Conical Brånemark Fixtures with Mandibular Overdentures Immediately following Surgery

Background: Prospective evaluation of the early loading of unsplinted Branemark implants with mandibular over‐dentures opposing conventional dentures is not evident in the implant‐related literature. Purpose: To clinically evaluate progressive and early loading of 20 unsplinted conical Brånemark implants in edentulous mandibles with overdentures. Materials and Methods: Ten edentulous patients all had two conical Brånemark implants placed in the anterior mandible with mandatory primary stability with bicortical anchorage. Ball abutment connection was performed simultaneously. Previously constructed conventional mandibular dentures were temporarily relined with tissue conditioner postoperatively and worn with moderation for the first 2 weeks to allow progressive loading. Early loading of the implants followed after 2 weeks, with inclusion of the respective matrices in the mandibular dentures, using a definitive reline procedure. Results: All patients successfully functioned with their mandibular implant overdentures from 2 to 52 weeks postoperatively. Mean marginal bone loss was within established criteria for success:0.22 mm (SD = 0.48 mm) mesially and 0.30 mm (SD = 0.39 mm) distally on the conical implants. Mobility tests using the Periotest instrument became more negative, although not at statistically significant levels. Difficulties in the management of the peri‐implant mucosa between surgery and loading at 2 weeks were observed in 40% of the patients. Conclusions: These preliminary 1‐year results show that successful early loading of unsplinted conical Brånemark implants with mandibular overdentures is possible.     

Patient satisfaction and dissatisfaction with mandibular two-implant overdentures using different attachment systems: 5-year outcomes

BACKGROUND: Different attachment systems for mandibular two-implant overdentures could influence levels of patient satisfaction. Positive consensus of the majority of patients being satisfied does not preclude the possibility of dissatisfaction for some. PURPOSE: To evaluate patient satisfaction before and after 5 years of wearing mandibular two-implant overdentures using different attachment systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 106 edentulous participants enrolled in a clinical trial completed a preliminary self-report inventory of their original complete denture complaints. New complete maxillary dentures and mandibular two-implant overdentures were provided to each participant using one of six different attachment systems. Patient satisfaction was determined at pretreatment; at baseline with mandibular two-implant overdenture insertion; and then annually for 5 years, using visual analogue and Likert-type scales. ReSULTS: Patient satisfaction with mandibular two-implant overdentures at baseline was significantly improved in all domains compared to pretreatment (old dentures) and sustained up to the 5-year recall. The level of satisfaction with Straumann gold alloy matrices at 5 years was significantly lower than that with other attachment systems. Highly significant differences were found with some social and psychological aspects by the fifth year compared to baseline. Diagnostic and prognostic indicators from a pretreatment inventory identified 12 participants (13.5%) who were dissatisfied. These indicators revealed a maladaptive predisposition to mandibular two-implant overdentures. ConclusIONS: A mandibular two-implant overdenture (opposing a conventional complete maxillary denture) will improve patient satisfaction, regardless of the attachment system. Careful evaluation of pretreatment complaints with conventional dentures can possibly identify patient dissatisfaction with mandibular two-implant overdentures.     

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.     

The effects of mandibular two-implant overdentures on nutrition in elderly edentulous individuals

It is unclear whether mandibular implant overdentures improve the nutritional state of edentulous patients better than conventional dentures. In a randomized clinical trial, we tested for post-treatment differences in nutritional status between patients with mandibular two-implant retained overdentures and those with conventional complete dentures. Edentulous subjects (ages 65-75 yrs) received two-implant mandibular overdentures (IOD, n = 30) or conventional dentures (CD, n = 30). Measures of nutritional state were gathered before and 6 mos after treatment. Significant improvements in anthropometric parameters were detected in the IOD but not in the CD group, for percent body fat (p = 0.011) and skin-fold thickness at the biceps, subscapularis, and abdomen (p < 0.05), with significant decreases in waist circumference (p < 0.0001) and waist-hip ratio (p = 0.001). Significant increases were seen in concentrations of serum albumin (p = 0.015), hemoglobin (p = 0.01), and B12 (p = 0.01). No significant between-group differences were found. These results suggest that low-cost IOD treatment may improve the nutritional state of edentulous people.     

Single mandibular implant study – denture satisfaction in the elderly

To investigate whether there are differences in patients’ denture satisfaction when an implant placed in the midline of the edentulous mandible is loaded either immediately or three months later, after second‐stage surgery. One hundred and fifty‐eight edentulous patients received a single implant in the midline of the mandible. After randomisation, it was loaded either immediately after implant placement (N = 81, group A) or three months later, after a submerged healing phase and a second‐stage surgery (N = 77, group B). Patients’ denture satisfaction aspects were assessed, using visual analogue scales (VAS), before treatment, one month after implant placement during the submerged healing phase (only group B) and one and four months after implant loading. The statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank and rank‐sum tests. One month after loading, a significant improvement in comfort, function and stability of the mandibular denture could be observed in both groups (P ≤ 0·05). A slight but not significant improvement was found between one and four months after loading. Patients with second‐stage surgery and delayed loading rated the stability and fit of the mandibular denture as significantly better than patients who had immediate loading. A single implant in the edentulous mandible significantly increased patients’ denture satisfaction. After four months, stability and fit of the mandibular denture were considered better when a delayed loading protocol had been followed. A single mandibular implant in the edentulous mandible significantly increases patients’ denture satisfaction, regardless of the loading protocol.     

Impact of implant support for mandibular dentures on satisfaction, oral and general health-related quality of life: a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine systematically the data published on the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures from the patient's perspective.
Material and methods: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and The Cochrane Systematic Reviews Database were searched and complemented by hand searching. All randomized-controlled trials published in English or French up to April 2007 were included, in which conventional dentures and mandibular implant overdentures in adult edentulous individuals were compared. The outcomes of interest were patient satisfaction, oral and general health-related quality of life. Random effects models were used to pool the effect sizes (ES) of all included studies.
Results: Ten publications of seven randomized-controlled trials were identified and eight were included in the meta-analysis. When compared with mandibular conventional dentures, implant overdentures were rated to be more satisfactory at a clinically relevant level [pooled ES 0.80, z =3.56, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.36–1.24, P =0.0004], but a statistical heterogeneity was found (χ²=31.63, df=5, P <0.00001, I ²=84%). The pooled ES for oral health quality of life was −0.41 ( z =1.31, 95% CI, −1.02 to 0.20; P =0.19, χ²=11.53, df=2, P <0.003, I ²=83%). There was a lack of evidence to show the impact of mandibular implant overdenture on perceived general health.
Conclusions: Our findings suggest that, although mandibular implant-retained overdentures may be more satisfying for edentulous patients than new conventional dentures, the magnitude of the effect is still uncertain. There is a need for additional evidence including cost-effectiveness analyses on the impact of mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures.     

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.     

Three-year clinical outcome of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures--results of preliminary prospective study

Objectives

The aim of this preliminary prospective study was to evaluate the clinical outcome, the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), and the subjective chewing ability of patients with mandibular complete dentures retained by a single implant placed in the mandible midline.

Methods

Patients wearing complete dentures were treated with a single implant in the mandible, followed by relining of the dentures and incorporation of ball attachments for implant retention. Implant outcome, prosthodontic maintenance, subjective chewing ability, and the oral health impact profile of the patients were assessed at baseline and at four weeks after connecting the denture and implant.

Results

Eleven patients were enrolled in this investigation, and the mean observation period was 43.4 months (minimum period: 35, maximum period: 52 months). No implants were lost during observation period, but four dentures needed repair because of the fracture of the denture base in the midline area. A significant improvement was observed in the OHRQoL of the patients after the attachment of the mandibular dentures with a single midline implant. Furthermore, the subjective chewing ability of the patients was significantly improved after implant connection.

Conclusions

Within the limitations of this preliminary prospective clinical study, single implant-supported mandibular overdentures were a successful treatment option for older edentulous patients who showed improvements in their OHRQoL and chewing ability.     

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.     

Comparison of patient satisfaction,quality of life,and bite force between elderly edentulous patients wearing mandibular two implant‐supported overdentures and conventional complete dentures after 4 years

This study compared two groups of patients who were elderly and edentulous, one group included subjects who had mandibular overdentures supported by two implants (Group I); the other groups wore conventional complete dentures (Group II). This retrospective study included 100 edentulous patients (50 from each group) with an average age of 67.86 years, who had been followed for 4 years. The groups were compared in terms of patient satisfaction, quality of life (QOL), and bite force. The bite force and patient satisfaction scores of Group I were found to be statistically significantly higher than Group II (p < .05). However, no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups’ QOL scores (p > .05) except on the physical pain subscale (p = .013). Based on these results, it can be concluded that after 4 years of function, subjects wearing mandibular overdentures supported by two implants had higher values for bite force and patient satisfaction scores, but similar QOL scores when compared to conventional complete denture‐wearers.