Satisfaction of patients with mandibular implant-supported overdentures using a generalized estimating equation model: A prospective study
Mandibular implant overdentures
Aims: To assess the effect of history of conventional denture use, number of implants, age, gender, and time passed since delivery (1 and 3 months) on satisfaction of patients with mandibular implant-supported overdentures.
Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted on 54 eligible edentulous patients (48-74 years, 30 males and 24 females). After obtaining written informed consent and ethical approval, the patients filled out a questionnaire regarding their satisfaction level with the overdenture. Data were analyzed by the generalized estimating equation (GEE) model at 5% level of significance.
Results: History of denture use (P=0.232) and number of implants (P=0.609) had no significant effect on the overall satisfaction of patients. The overall satisfaction was not significantly different between males and females (P=0.415). The effect of time passed since delivery and age on satisfaction level was significant, such that the overall percentage of satisfaction was higher at 3 months after delivery (P<0.001) and in older individuals (P=0.040).
Conclusion: The satisfaction level of patients with mandibular implant-supported overdentures depended on the time passed since delivery and age of patients; number of implants (2 or 3) and history of denture use had no significant effect on patient satisfaction with the overdenture.
2. Bakker MH, Vissink A, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Visser A. Mandibular implant‐supported overdentures in (frail) elderly: A prospective study with 20‐year follow‐up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2019;21:586-592.
3. Meijer HJA, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RHK, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:722-728.
4. Sharka R, Abed H, Hector M. Oral health‐related quality of life and satisfaction of edentulous patients using conventional complete dentures and implant‐retained overdentures: An umbrella systematic review. Gerodontology 2019;36:195-204.
5. Mahanna FF, Elsyad MA, Mourad SI, Abozaed HW. Satisfaction and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life of Different Attachments Used for Implant-Retained Overdentures in Subjects with Resorbed Mandibles: A Crossover Trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2020;35:423-431.
6. Mishra SK, Chowdhary R. Patient’s oral health-related quality of life and satisfaction with implant supported overdentures-a systematic review. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 2019;9:340-346.
7. Naert I, Alsaadi G, Quirynen M. Prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with two-implant-retained mandibular overdentures: a 10-year randomized clinical study. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:401-410.
8. Yunus N, Saub R, Bai Taiyeb Ali T, Mohd Salleh N, Rustum Baig M. Patient-Based and Clinical Outcomes of Implant Telescopic Attachment–Retained Mandibular Overdentures: A 1-Year Longitudinal Prospective Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29.
9. Cerutti‐Kopplin D, Emami E, Hilgert JB, Hugo FN, Rivaldo E, Padilha DMP. Predictors of Satisfaction with Dentures in a Cohort of Individuals Wearing Old Dentures: Functional Quality or Patient‐Reported Measures? J Prosthodont 2017;26:196-200.
10. Pera P, Bassi F, Schierano G, Appendino P, Preti G. Implant anchored complete mandibular denture: evaluation of masticatory efficiency, oral function and degree of satisfaction. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25:462-467.
11. Turkyilmaz I, Company AM, McGlumphy EA. Should edentulous patients be constrained to removable complete dentures? The use of dental implants to improve the quality of life for edentulous patients. Gerodontology 2010;27:3-10.
12. Siadat H, Alikhasi M, Mirfazaelian A, Geramipanah F, Zaery F. Patient satisfaction with implant‐retained mandibular overdentures: a retrospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2008;10:93-98.
13. Kucukkurt S, Tükel H. Does number of implants or type of attachment affect patient satisfaction with implant-retained mandibular overdentures? J Osseointegration 2020;12.
14. Topkaya T, Solmaz MY. The effect of implant number and position on the stress behavior of mandibular implant retained overdentures: A three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Biomech 2015;48:2102-2109.
15. Dantas IdS, Souza MBCd, Morais MHdST, Carreiro AdFP, Barbosa GAS. Success and survival rates of mandibular overdentures supported by two or four implants: a systematic review. Braz Oral Res 2014;28:74-80.
16. El-Anwar MI, El-Taftazany EA, Hamed HA, ElHay MAA. Influence of number of implants and attachment type on stress distribution in mandibular implant-retained overdentures: finite element analysis. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2017;5:244.
17. Mumcu E, Bilhan H, Geckili O. The effect of attachment type and implant number on satisfaction and quality of life of mandibular implant‐retained overdenture wearers. Gerodontology 2012;29:e618-e23.
18. Klemetti E. Is there a certain number of implants needed to retain an overdenture? J Oral Rehabil 2008;35 Suppl 1:80-84.
19. Toia M, Wennerberg A, Torrisi P, Farina V, Corrà E, Cecchinato D. Patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes in implant‐supported overdentures retained by milled bars: Two‐year follow‐up. J Oral Rehabil 2019;46:624-633.
20. Mahgoli H, Asadi S, Hajmahmoudi M, Moharrami M, Arshad M. Mandibular Overdentures Supported by Two vs Four Endosteal Implants: A Retrospective Cohort Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019;20:582-586.
21. Matthys C, Vervaeke S, Besseler J, De Bruyn H. Five‐year study of mandibular overdentures on stud abutments: Clinical outcome, patient satisfaction and prosthetic maintenance—Influence of bone resorption and implant position. Clin Oral Implants Res 2019;30:940-951.
22. Emami E, Alesawy A, de Grandmont P, Cerutti‐Kopplin D, Kodama N, Menassa M et al. A within‐subject clinical trial on the conversion of mandibular two‐implant to three‐implant overdenture: Patient‐centered outcomes and willingness to pay. Clin Oral Implants Res 2019;30:218-228.
23. Balaguer J, Ata-Ali J, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, García B, Peñarrocha-Diago M. Long-term survival rates of implants supporting overdentures. J Oral Implantol 2015;41:173-177.
24. Emami E, de Souza RF, Bernier J, Rompré P, Feine JS. Patient perceptions of the mandibular three‐implant overdenture: a practice‐based study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:639-643.
25. Bhat S, Chowdhary R, Mahoorkar S. Comparison of masticatory efficiency, patient satisfaction for single, two, and three implants supported overdenture in the same patient: A pilot study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16:182-186.
26. Liu J, Pan S, Dong J, Mo Z, Fan Y, Feng H. Influence of implant number on the biomechanical behaviour of mandibular implant-retained/supported overdentures: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Dent 2013;41:241-249.
27. Pan Y-H, Yu L-M, Lin T-M. Dental implant-retained mandibular overdenture therapy: A clinical study of patients' response. J Dent Sci 2014;9:118-124.
28. Fernandez-Estevan L, Montero J, Otaolaurruchi EJS, Ruiz FS. Patient-centered and clinical outcomes of mandibular overdentures retained with the locator system: A prospective observational study. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:367-372.
29. Heckmann S, Heussinger S, Linke J, Graef F, Pröschel P. Improvement and long‐term stability of neuromuscular adaptation in implant‐supported overdentures. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1200-1205.
30. Mericske-Stern R. Treatment outcomes with implant-supported overdentures: clinical considerations. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:66-73.
31. Mericske-Stern RD, Taylor TD, Belser U. Management of the edentulous patient. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11 Suppl 1:108-125.
32. Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP. Treatment outcomes of fixed or removable implant-supported prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part I: patients’ assessments. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83:424-433.
33. Balaguer J, García B, Peñarrocha M, Peñarrocha M. Satisfaction of patients fitted with implant-retained overdentures. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011;16:e204-209.
34. Kuoppala R, Näpänkangas R, Raustia A. Outcome of implant‐supported overdenture treatment–a survey of 58 patients. Gerodontology 2012;29:e577-e584.
35. Kuoppala R, Näpänkangas R, Raustia A. Quality of life of patients treated with implant-supported mandibular overdentures evaluated with the oral health impact profile (OHIP-14): A survey of 58 patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;4:e4.
36. Pan Y-H, Lin T-M, Liang C-H. Comparison of patient's satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures and complete dentures. Biomed J. 2014;37:156-62.
37. Ellis JS, Burawi G, Walls A, Thomason JM. Patient satisfaction with two designs of implant supported removable overdentures; ball attachment and magnets. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1293-1298.
38. Jacobs R, Van Steenberghe D, Manders E, Van Looy C, Lembrechts D, Naert I. Evaluation of speech in patients rehabilitated with various oral implant‐supported prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:167-173.
39. Scherer MD, McGlumphy EA, Seghi RR, Campagni WV. Comparison of retention and stability of implant-retained overdentures based upon implant number and distribution. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:1619-1628.
40. Karbach J, Hartmann S, Jahn-Eimermacher A, Wagner W. Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in Edentulous Patients with Two-vs Four-Locator-Retained Mandibular Overdentures: A Prospective, Randomized, Crossover Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015;30:1143-1148.
41. Elsyad MA, Hegazy SA, Hammouda NI, Al‐Tonbary GY, Habib AA. Chewing efficiency and electromyographic activity of masseter muscle with three designs of implant‐supported mandibular overdentures. A cross‐over study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:742-748.
42. Wafa’a R, Swelem AA, Radi IA. The effect of 2 versus 4 implants on implant stability in mandibular overdentures: A randomized controlled trial. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:725-731.
43. Visser A, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A. Implant-retained mandibular overdentures versus conventional dentures: 10 years of care and aftercare. Int J Prosthodont 2006;19:271-278.
- Abstract views: 14
- pdf: 3
Copyright (c) 2021 Ariesdue
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.