Patient satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures 6 months after delivery

Thomason, J. M.; Jp, Lund; Chehadé, A; Feine, Jocelyne

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.12.011

Cited by 100 publications

(175 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

150

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are in accordance with result of clinical studies. 30,31 There was no significant difference between ball and bar attachment for general satisfaction and masticatory capacity (T ¼ 0.00, P ¼ 1.000; T ¼ À0.37, P ¼ 0.717). These findings are in accordance with study conducted by Cune M et al in which the authors evaluated patient satisfaction, clinical and prosthetic outcomes of two implant mandibular overdenture with different attachment types.…”

Section: S351mentioning

confidence: 89%

A clinico radiographic study of immediate loading implants in rehabilitation of mandibular ridges

Viswambaran¹,

Arora²,

Gupta³

et al. 2015

Medical Journal Armed Forces India

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methods: A total of 30 completely edentulous patients male or female, in the age group of 54e78 years (mean age 65 years), wearing conventional complete dentures were selected and randomly divided in to two groups. A total of 60 implants were placed in the interforaminal area of the mental symphysis (two implants per patients) in 30 patients. Two types of attachment systems namely Ball for group-A and Bar for group-B were used and immediate loading done.Implants were evaluated clinically and radiographically at baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 9 months. All clinical and radiographic parameters were subjected to statistical analysis.Result: The implant survival rate for group-A (ball attachment) was 93.3% and implant survival rate for group-B (bar attachment) was 93.3%. The overall implant survival rate was not dependent on the attachment system. There was no significant difference in the crestal bone loss in mesial, and distal side in implants with respect to ball and bar attachment for different period of observation (F ¼ 0.25; P ¼ 0.910; F ¼ 0.07; P ¼ 0.992 respectively). m e d i c a l j o u r n a l a r m e d f o r c e s i n d i a 7 1 ( 2 0 1 5 ) S 3 4 6 eS 3 5 4

show abstract

Section: S351mentioning

confidence: 89%

A clinico radiographic study of immediate loading implants in rehabilitation of mandibular ridges

Viswambaran¹,

Arora²,

Gupta³

et al. 2015

Medical Journal Armed Forces India

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hareketli bölümlü protezler ve total protezlere göre daha başarılı bir hasta konforu sunan implant destekli protezler hem hekimler hem de hastalar için oldukça tatmin edici klinik sonuçlar sağlamaktadır. 15,16 Uygulanan implantların %33'ü için diş destekli sabit bölümlü protez yapılması mümkün olduğu halde implant destekli sabit protez planlanmış olması klinik açıdan ele alındığında, hastaların fonksiyonel ve estetik beklentilerinin yanı sıra uzun süreli protez başarısı için de implant tedavisini tercih ettikleri yönünde yorumlanabilmektedir.…”

Section: Tartiġmaunclassified

Dental İmplant Uygulamalarinin Demografi̇k Ve Kli̇ni̇k Özelli̇kleri̇ni̇n Değerlendi̇ri̇lmesi̇

URVASIZOĞLU¹,

Saruhan²,

Ataol³

2016

Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ÖZAmaç: Diş hekimliğinin güncel hedefi hastaların fonksiyonel ve estetik beklentilerini karşılayacak şekilde tedavi sunmaktır. Dental implant tedavisi; diş kayıplarının rehabilitasyonu için oldukça etkili bir metottur ve son yıllarda gittikçe artan sayıda uygulanmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı; kliniğimizde dental implant cerrahisi uygulanan hastaların demografik ve klinik durumlarını ve yerleştirilen implantların özelliklerini retrospektif olarak incelemek ve tanımlayıcı istatistiksel yöntemler ile değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve yöntem: Bu çalışmada 2014 ve 2015 yılla-rında çalışma ekibimiz tarafından opere edilmiş hastalar yaş, cinsiyet, dişsizlik durumu, implant uygulanan bölgeler ve yerleştirilen implantların çeşitli özellikleri açısından incelenmiştir ve sonuçlar tanımlayıcı istatistiksel analiz metotları ile değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular: 20 erkek (%29,9) ve 47 kadın (%70,1) olmak üzere toplam 67 hasta ve toplam 233 dental implant değerlendirilmiştir. Hastaların yaş aralığı incelendiğinde; ortalama yaş 41,1'dir. En sık tedavi edilen yaş aralığı 46-55 yaş arası olup toplam 20 hasta (%29,8) olarak belirlenmiştir. 124 implantın maksillaya (%53,2) ve 109 implantın ise mandibulaya (%46,8) yerleştirildiği görülmüştür. Sonuç: Bu çalışmada; dental implant uygulamalarının demografik ve klinik özelliklerinin değerlendirilmiş ve estetik alanda daha uzun ve daha dar çaplı, posterior alanda daha kısa ve daha geniş çaplı implantların kullanıldığı görülmüştür. En sık implant uygulaması gereksinimi duyulan maksiller ve mandibular birinci molar bölgelerine uygulanan implantların boyları ve çapları benzerlik göstermiştir. Anahtar kelimeler: Retrospektif çalışmalar, dişsiz çene, diş implantları, implant destekli diş protezi ABSTRACT Aim: The contemporary goal of dentistry is to provide both infection control and treatment to satisfy the functional and aesthetic expectations. The dental implant treatment is a highly effective method for rehabilitation of tooth loss and is applied in increasing numbers in recent years. The aims of this study were to analyze retrospectively of the demographic data of patients undergoing dental implant surgery and properties of implants and to evaluate with the descriptive statistical methods. Material and method:In this study, patients had been operated between 2014 and 2015 by our working team were evaluated. Patients studied in terms of age, gender, status of edentulism, implant zones and various features of these implants and datas evaluated with descriptive statistical analysis methods. Results: 67 patients including 20 male (29,9%) and 47 female (70,1%) patients with 233 dental implants were evaluated. When the age range of patients estimated, mean age is 41.1 year and the most treated age range is 46-55 years with 20 patient (29,8%). It was observed that 124 (53.2%) of implants were placed to maxilla and 109 (46.8%) of implants were placed to mandible. Conclusıon: In this study, demographic and clinical features of dental implant applications were evaluated and it's founded that longer and nar...

show abstract

“…1,2 This timely study addresses a current area of contention. How much training do dentists need to provide implant-supported prostheses?…”

Section: Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%

General dentists can provide successful implant overdentures with minimal training

Jagger

2007

Evid Based Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can inexperienced dentists provide two-implant overdentures that are as satisfactory, and at the same cost, as those provided by experienced prosthodontists? Design This randomised controlled trial (RCT) used a 2×2 factorial design. Intervention Edentulous people of age >65 years were enrolled in the RCT, which was designed to compare the effects on nutrition of conventional and two-implant mandibular overdentures . They were randomly assigned to groups treated either by an experienced prosthodontist or by a newly-graduated dentist who had undergone minimal training in implant treatment. Outcome measure The change in patient ratings of satisfaction after treatment, laboratory costs, and the number of unscheduled visits up to 6 months following delivery of the prosthesis were compared. To determine the clinicians' perception of difficulty in providing the two prosthetic treatments, a short questionnaire was administered using telephone interviews. Results Data were gathered from the first 140 patients who had been treated by either one of the three prosthodontists or by one of the eight newly graduated dentists. The prosthodontists provided a total of 28 implant overdentures and 46 conventional dentures, whereas the inexperienced dentists provided 33 prostheses for each kind. Satisfaction was significantly higher with implant overdentures than with conventional dentures, but there were no differences in scores for either prosthesis between the groups treated by experienced specialists or new dentists. The laboratory costs of fabricating implant overdentures were significantly higher than the cost of conventional dentures. There was no significant difference between the two groups of clinicians in mean laboratory costs, however, for either conventional dentures or implant overdentures. There was no significant between-group difference in the number of unscheduled visits for either prosthesis. Furthermore, six of the seven inexperienced dentists reported that they found the mandibular two-implant overdenture easier to provide than the conventional denture. Conclusions Inexperienced dental practitioners can provide successful mandibular two-implant overdentures for their patients with minimal training.

show abstract

Patient satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures 6 months after delivery

Cited by 100 publications

References 0 publications

A clinico radiographic study of immediate loading implants in rehabilitation of mandibular ridges

A clinico radiographic study of immediate loading implants in rehabilitation of mandibular ridges

Dental İmplant Uygulamalarinin Demografi̇k Ve Kli̇ni̇k Özelli̇kleri̇ni̇n Değerlendi̇ri̇lmesi̇

General dentists can provide successful implant overdentures with minimal training

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About