Multicentre prospective evaluation of implant-assisted mandibular bilateral distal extension removable partial dentures: Patient satisfaction

Objective To compare the levels of patient satisfaction with either conventional mandibular bilateral distal extension partial dentures or those assisted by bilateral distal implants. Materials and methods Forty‐eight participants who were dissatisfied with their existing conventional mandibular dis...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical oral implants research 2013-01, Vol.24 (1), p.20-27
Main Authors: Wismeijer, Daniel, Tawse-Smith, Andrew, Payne, Alan G. T.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Chewing
Colombia
Dental Abutments
Dental Implants
Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported
Dentistry
Denture Retention
Denture, Partial, Removable
Female
Humans
implant
Jaw, Edentulous, Partially - rehabilitation
Male
Mandible - surgery
Middle Aged
Netherlands
New Zealand
partial dentures
Patient Satisfaction
Prospective Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective To compare the levels of patient satisfaction with either conventional mandibular bilateral distal extension partial dentures or those assisted by bilateral distal implants. Materials and methods Forty‐eight participants who were dissatisfied with their existing conventional mandibular distal extension dentures opposing complete maxillary dentures were selected for a multicentre prospective study in New Zealand, Colombia and the Netherlands. A control group of 12 participants in New Zealand received conventional mandibular partial dentures. Three test groups involving 36 participants in New Zealand (12), Colombia (12) and the Netherlands (12) received bilateral distal implants in the second molar regions. After conventional loading, the test group participants initially had healing caps placed on the distal implants providing support only, followed after approximately 6 months by ball abutments (retentive anchors) for support and retention. Patient outcomes were determined with questionnaires completed at specific stages of the study for up to 3 years. Results Visual analogue scale, Likert and oral health impact questionnaires before and after treatment indicated improved results. There were significantly improved parameters of overall satisfaction, stability, chewing and appearance after 3 years (P 
ISSN:0905-7161
1600-0501
DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02367.x