An Eight-year Follow-up to a Randomized Clinical Trial of Participant Satisfaction with Three Types of Mandibular Implant-retained Overdentures

Abstract

Studies have shown that mandibular implant overdentures significantly increase satisfaction and quality of life of edentulous elders. Improved chewing ability appears to have a positive impact on nutritional state. Therefore, it is important to determine the best design of this prosthesis over the long term. In this randomized controlled trial, three groups of edentulous participants with atrophic mandibles wore 3 types of implant overdentures. During an eight-year follow-up, only seven of the 110 participants had dropped out of this study. Almost all participants were still satisfied with their overdentures. Participant satisfaction concerning retention and stability of the mandibular overdenture had decreased significantly in the two-implant ball attachment group, whereas the opinion of participants in the single- and triple-bar groups was still at the same level. The long-term results suggest that a mandibular overdenture retained by 2 implants with a single bar may be the best treatment strategy for edentulous people with atrophic ridges.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Al Quran F, Clifford T, Cooper C, Lamey PJ (2001). Influence of psychological factors on the acceptance of complete dentures. Gerodontology 18:35–40.

Antczak-Bouckoms A, Chalmers TC (1988). The importance of design and analysis in clinical trials. J Oral Implantol 14:36–42.

Boerrigter EM, Stegenga B, Raghoebar GM, Boering G (1995). Patient satisfaction and chewing ability with implant-retained mandibular overdentures: a comparison with new complete dentures with or without preprosthetic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 53:1167–1173.

Burns DR (2000). Mandibular implant overdenture treatment: consensus and controversy. J Prosthodont 9:37–46.

Cohen J (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Academic Press.

Coulthard P, Esposito M, Jokstad A, Worthington HV (2004). Interventions for replacing missing teeth: surgical techniques for placing dental implants (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library. Issue 2. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Esposito M, Coulthard P, Worthington HV, Jokstad A (2001). Quality assessment of randomized controlled trials of oral implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 16:783–792.

Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, et al. (2002). The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 24–25, 2002. Int J Prosthodont 15:413–414.

Jemt T, Chai J, Harnett J, Heath MR, Hutton JE, Johns RB, et al. (1996). A 5-year prospective multicenter follow-up report on overdentures supported by osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 11:291–298.

10.

Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Van’t Hof MA, Geertman ME, Van Oort RP (1999). Implant-retained mandibular overdentures compared with complete dentures; a 5-years’ follow-up study of clinical aspects and patient satisfaction. Clin Oral Implants Res 10:238–244.

11.

Mericske-Stern R (1998). Treatment outcomes with implant-supported overdentures: clinical considerations. J Prosthet Dent 79:66–73.

12.

Naert IE, Gizani S, Vuylsteke M, van Steenberghe D (1997). A randomised clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants in mandibular overdenture therapy. A 3-year report. Clin Oral Invest 1:81–88.

13.

Naert I, Gizani S, Vuylsteke M, van Steenberghe D (1999). A 5-year prospective randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining a mandibular overdenture: prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction. J Oral Rehabil 26:195–202.

14.

Sadowsky SJ (2001). Mandibular implant-retained overdentures: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 86:468–473.

15.

Tang L, Lund JP, Tache R, Clokie CM, Feine JS (1997). A within-subject comparison of mandibular long-bar and hybrid implant-supported prostheses: psychometric evaluation and patient preference. J Dent Res 76:1675–1683.

16.

van Kampen FM, van der Bilt A, Cune MS, Bosman F (2002). The influence of various attachment types in mandibular implant-retained overdentures on maximum bite force and EMG. J Dent Res 81:170–173.

17.

van Waas MA (1990). Determinants of dissatisfaction with dentures: a multiple regression analysis. J Prosthet Dent 64:569–572.

18.

Wismeijer D, van Waas MA, Vermeeren JI (1995). Overdentures supported by ITI implants: a 6.5-year evaluation of patient satisfaction and prosthetic aftercare. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 10:744–749.

19.

Wismeijer D, van Waas MA, Vermeeren JI, Kalk W (1997a). Patients’ perception of sensory disturbances of the mental nerve before and after implant surgery: a prospective study of 110 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 35:254–259.

20.

Wismeijer D, van Waas MA, Vermeeren JI, Mulder J, Kalk W (1997b). Patient satisfaction with implant-supported mandibular overdentures. A comparison of three treatment strategies with ITI-dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 26:263–267.

21.

Wismeijer D, van Waas MA, Mulder J, Vermeeren JI, Kalk W (1999). Clinical and radiological results of patients treated with three treatment modalities for overdentures on implants of the ITI Dental Implant System. A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 10:297–306.

22.

Zielhuis GA, Straatman H, Van’t Hof-Grootenboer AE, Van Lier HJ, Rach GH, van den Broek P (1990). The choice of a balanced allocation method for a clinical trial in otitis media with effusion. Stat Med 9:237–246.