» Articles » PMID: 30372576

Patient Satisfaction Versus Retention of Implant Overdentures with Two Attachment Systems: A Randomized Trial

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2018 Oct 30
PMID 30372576
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Clinical success with mandibular implant overdentures is highly dependent on a reliable attachment system connecting prosthesis and implants.

Purpose: To compare the levels of retention and patient-based outcomes on implant overdentures retained/supported by cylindrical (LA) and ball (RA) attachment systems overtime and investigate their relationship.

Materials And Methods: Attachment retention (Newtons), and patient satisfaction with the treatment, prosthesis stability, and ability to chew (VAS, 100 mm) were assessed in a crossover trial for both attachment systems at baseline, 1 week, 3, 6, and 12 months and compared to preintervention values. Patients' preference was also recorded.

Results: Mean retention of worn attachments and patient satisfaction with denture retention assessed in the preintervention phase were 3.2 N (SD 4.9) and 23.5 mm (IQR 6.5-65.5), respectively. Overall mean retention along the study was higher for RA than LA (difference of 5.0 N, 95%CI: 2.5-7.6; P = 0.0005), declining significantly overtime (P < 0.0001), more steeply for the cylindrical attachment. Differences in VAS ratings between attachments were nonsignificant in the crossover phase (P > 0.05), but general satisfaction, satisfaction with retention, and comfort were significantly higher when compared with preintervention scores (P < 0.05). Ratings of retention decreased significantly overtime for both systems and earlier for LA than RA. Satisfaction was lower when retention was either too low or too high, although there was large variation in this association. At the end of the study, all participants chose to remain with the attachment system that they had received last.

Conclusions: Attachment selection should be based on patients' individual characteristics and expectations as satisfaction with the attachment retention and denture stability vary largely among patients.

Citing Articles

Retentive force and dislodgment time variations between three implant overdenture stud attachments in an acidic environment: An in-vitro pilot study.

Farhat M, Daher T, Hajjar J, Boulos P Saudi Dent J. 2024; 36(2):368-373.

PMID: 38419987 PMC: 10897603. DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2023.11.027.


The Effect of Mini Dental Implant Number on Mandibular Overdenture Retention and Attachment Wear.

Alshenaiber R, Barclay C, Silikas N Biomed Res Int. 2023; 2023:7099761.

PMID: 37168235 PMC: 10164865. DOI: 10.1155/2023/7099761.


Mandibular implant-supported overdenture: A systematic review and meta-analysis for optimum selection of attachment system.

Sutariya P, Shah H, Patel S, Upadhyay H, Pathan M, Shah R J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2021; 21(4):319-327.

PMID: 34810359 PMC: 8617439. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_158_21.


Biomechanical Aspects of Various Attachments for Implant Overdentures: A Review.

Mirchandani B, Zhou T, Heboyan A, Yodmongkol S, Buranawat B Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13(19).

PMID: 34641063 PMC: 8512762. DOI: 10.3390/polym13193248.


Factors associated with edentulous patients' willingness about implant-supported complete denture: a multivariate analysis.

Verissimo A, Ribeiro A, de Medeiros A, de Melo L, Carreiro A Clin Oral Investig. 2021; 26(2):1835-1842.

PMID: 34491447 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-04158-2.