Patient‐reported outcomes of maxillary implant‐supported overdentures compared with conventional dentures. Issue 4 (15th April 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zembic, Anja; Wismeijer, Daniel
• Is Part Of: Clinical oral implants research. Volume 25:Issue 4(2014:Apr.)
• Page Start: 441
• Page End: 450
• Publication Date: 2013-04-15
• Subjects: Dental implants -- Research -- Periodicals; 617.69
• DOI: 10.1111/clr.12169
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0905-7161

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="clr12169-abs-0001"> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="clr12169-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Objective</title> <p>The aim of the present prospective clinical study was to compare patient‐reported outcomes for maxillary conventional dentures and maxillary implant‐supported dentures.</p> </sec> <sec id="clr12169-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Material and methods</title> <p>Twenty‐one patients (6 women and 15 men) being edentulous in the maxilla and encountering problems with their existing dentures were included. Twelve patients (4 women and 8 men) received a new set of conventional dentures, due to insufficient dentures. In nine patients (2 women and 7 men), the existing dentures were adjusted by means of relining or rebasing. All patients received implant‐supported dentures on two retentive anchors. In total, 42 implants were inserted in the anterior maxilla. The participants rated their satisfaction on their existing conventional dentures, 2 months after insertion of new conventional dentures and 2 months after insertion of implant‐supported dentures. Thereby, patients responded to questionnaires capturing the oral health impact profile (OHIP) using visual analog scales. Seven domains (functional limitation, physical pain, psychological discomfort, physical, psychological and social disability and handicap) were assessed. Higher scores implied poorer patient satisfaction. In addition, the questionnaire involved the evaluation of cleaning ability, general satisfaction, speech, comfort, esthetics, stability, and chewing ability. Higher scores implied higher patient satisfaction.</p> </sec> <sec id="clr12169-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>Patient satisfaction significantly increased for implant‐supported dentures compared with old dentures in all seven OHIP subgroups, as well as for cleaning ability, general satisfaction, ability to speak, comfort, esthetics, and stability (<italic>P</italic> < 0.05). The comparison of new conventional dentures and implant‐supported dentures revealed a statistically significantly increased satisfaction for functional limitation (difference of 33.2 mm), psychological discomfort (difference of 36.7 mm), physical disability (difference of 36.3 mm), and social disability (difference of 23.5 mm), (<italic>P</italic> < 0.05). Additionally, general satisfaction, chewing ability, speech, and stability significantly improved in implant‐supported dentures (<italic>P</italic> < 0.05).</p> </sec> <sec id="clr12169-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p>Within the limits of this study, maxillary dentures retained by two implants provided some significant short‐term improvements over conventional dentures in oral‐ and health‐related quality of life.</p> </sec> </abstract>