Background Loss of teeth has a negative influence on essential oral functions. It is important to understand edentulous patients’ perceptions about the impacts of treatment options on their oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) and satisfaction. Aims To appraise the systematic reviews (with/without meta‐analysis) that investigate the impacts of complete conventional dentures (CCDs) and/or implant‐retained overdentures (IRODs) on the oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) and satisfaction among edentulous patients. Methods The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for conduct of an umbrella systematic review was followed. Three database systems were used: Medline, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library. PROSPERO was searched for ongoing or recently completed systematic reviews. The reviews must report OHRQoL and patients’ satisfaction as outcomes. Results A total of eight reviews were included in data synthesis (six were systematic reviews without meta‐analysis, one was systematic review with meta‐analysis, and one was meta‐analysis). The level of evidence of all included reviews based on the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network ranged between 1+ and 1−. Conclusion The results of this umbrella systematic review demonstrate the superiority of using IRODs compared with CCDs on the OHRQoL and patients’ satisfaction outcomes. However, this positive impact is more accentuated when patients demand implant treatment or cannot adapt to CCDs treatment. Financial factors and adaptive capability indeed affect patient tolerance to both treatment modalities.

Aims This prospective observational study set out to assess patients' oral health knowledge, oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) and status immediately posttherapy, and adherence with oral health behaviors posttreatment with radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HaNC). Methods A prospective observational study post HaNC therapy. At time one (T1), prior to discharge to primary dental care, oral health knowledge, OHRQoL, and status were assessed and dental health advice was delivered. At time two (T2), four weeks postdischarge, patients' adherence with dental health advice was reassessed. Results Thirty people postradiotherapy were recruited (mean age 58.9, SD ± 8.4). Twenty‐three (77%) were men. Thirteen (45%) respondents reported they were not informed about the side effects of radiotherapy. On discharge to primary care, 20 (67%) of the respondents rated their oral health as fair or worse, while 47% were displeased with dental appearance. Respondents reported a mean of 8.6 impacts (SD ± 5.3) on OHRQoL. Five (17%) and two (7%) patients had an established or a new osteoradionecrosis, respectively, and 16 patients (53%) had greater than two new carious teeth. One month postdischarge (T2), adherence with dental advice was high, 93% were registered with a primary care dentist and all brushed their teeth daily. Conclusion Within the limitations of this study in a single‐center, adherence with oral health advice was high. However, participants felt they received little preparatory information about side effects and impacts of radiotherapy on oral and dental health, and how to maintain oral health after radiotherapy.