Patient satisfaction and oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) of conventional denture, fixed prosthesis and milled bar overdenture for All‐on‐4 implant rehabilitation. A crossover study

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate patient satisfaction and oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) of conventional denture, fixed prosthesis and milled bar overdenture for All‐on‐4 implant rehabilitation. Materials and methods Sixteen completely edentulous patients with ill‐fitted mandibular dentures received new mandibular dentures (CDs). After 3 months, 4 implants were installed according to the “All‐on‐4 concept” and immediately loaded with mandibular dentures. Three months after osseointegration, patients received either fixed prosthesis (FP) or milled bar overdenture (MB) in a crossover design. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS). OHRQoL was evaluated using the OHIP‐14. Questionnaires of VAS and OHIP‐14 were measured 3 months after wearing each of the following prostheses: CD, FP, and MB. Results For all questions of VAS and OHIP‐14, CD showed significant lower satisfaction compared to FP and MB (p < .00025). FP recorded significant higher VAS scores than MB regarding retention and stability (p < .00007). MB recorded significant higher scores than FP regarding general satisfaction, comfort, ease of cleaning, and handling (p < .00008). Regarding OHIP‐14, no significant differences in OHIP scores between FP and MB were observed for all domains of OHIP. Conclusion “All‐on‐4” implant rehabilitation of edentulous mandible with FP and MB achieves high patient satisfaction and OHRQoL compared to CD. No significant difference in OHRQoL between FP and MB was observed. Regarding VAS, FP rated greater satisfaction with retention, stability, and chewing compared to MB. However, MB rated greater satisfaction with ease of cleaning and handling compared to FP.

Marginal Bone Level Changes and Oral Health Impact Profile (14) Score of Smokers Treated by Mandibular Mini Implant Overdentures: A 5-Year Follow-up Study

“…18,19 Moreover, researchers believed that oral health impact profile (OHIP) is a reliable measure for oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of different prosthetic options. 21,23,24 One of the popular versions used to study implant overdentures was the short version of the oral health impact profile-14 (OHIP-14). 23,24 Completely edentulous patients with smoking habit may suffer more than normal patients from the deleterious effect of smoking, leading to bone loss and unsatisfactory oral health quality of life.…”

“…21,23,24 One of the popular versions used to study implant overdentures was the short version of the oral health impact profile-14 (OHIP-14). 23,24 Completely edentulous patients with smoking habit may suffer more than normal patients from the deleterious effect of smoking, leading to bone loss and unsatisfactory oral health quality of life. Mini implant overdenture is a successful treatment and could be considered as a standard health care for completely edentulous patients.…”

“…Many researches adopted patients’ satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life as major tools for prosthesis assessment. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 These researches used satisfaction questionnaires to test patients’ mini implant overdenture perception, satisfaction, and prosthetic maintenance aspects for intervals ranging from 3 to 7 years. In addition, visual analogue scale was used to augment some of these questionnaires to enhance reliability.…”

“… 18 19 Moreover, researchers believed that oral health impact profile (OHIP) is a reliable measure for oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of different prosthetic options. 21 23 24 One of the popular versions used to study implant overdentures was the short version of the oral health impact profile-14 (OHIP-14). 23 24 …”

“… 21 23 24 One of the popular versions used to study implant overdentures was the short version of the oral health impact profile-14 (OHIP-14). 23 24 …”