oralpresentation
Description

Title: 0715 - Single-implant Mandibular Overdenture Versus Conventional Denture: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Authors:

Túlio Nogueira (Presenter)
Federal University of Goias, Faculty of Dentistry

Fernanda Aguiar, Federal University of Goias, Faculty of Dentistry
Shahrokh Esfandiari, McGill University, Faculty of Dentistry
Cláudio Leles, Federal University of Goias, Faculty of Dentistry

Abstract:

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare effectiveness of the single-implant mandibular overdenture (SIMO) versus conventional mandibular denture (CMD) based on patient-reported outcomes.

Methods: A randomized controlled trial was carried out with edentulous individuals who met the inclusion criteria. All participants received a new set of maxillary and mandibular conventional dentures. After adaptation with the dentures, they were randomly assigned to one of the treatment groups: CMD or SIMO. For participants allocated to the SIMO group, a Straumann® Standard Plus SLActive® regular neck implant was placed in the mandibular midline followed by the connection of a healing abutment. After 3 weeks, the retention system (3.4-mm retentive titanium anchor abutment and the corresponding elliptical matrix) was incorporated intraorally. Oral health-related quality of life (OHIP-Edent) and patient satisfaction (0–100 visual analogue scale) were set as primary outcomes, and were assessed prior to the allocation and at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Bivariate analysis was performed using non-parametric Mann-Whitney and Friedman tests.

Results: The final sample consisted of 38 participants (CMD: n=22; SIMO: n=16), mean age 63.8 (±9.9) years, 79.3% women. There were no baseline differences between treatment groups concerning OHIP-Edent scores (p=0.421) and patient satisfaction (p=0.715). Conversely, significant differences were found at the 12-months follow-up, expressed as lower OHIP-Edent scores (p=0.028) and higher patient satisfaction (p=0.001) for SIMO group. A linear improvement on patient-reported outcomes occurred from baseline to 6- and 12-months follow-up for the SIMO group regarding OHIP-Edent scores (p=0.006) and patient satisfaction (p=0.002). No significant changes were observed for the CMD group.

Conclusions: Our results show that the SIMO significantly improved patients’ satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life when compared to the CCD. This suggests that SIMO can be a viable treatment modality for the oral rehabilitation of edentulous subjects.

Student Presenter

This abstract is based on research that was funded entirely or partially by an outside source:
International Team for Implantology (ITI), grant number 966_2014

Disclosure Statement:
The submitter must disclose the names of the organizations with which any author have a relationship, the nature of the relationship, and the clinical or research area involved. The following is submitted: The implants and prosthodontic items that were used in this study were supplied by the Straumann Company, which provides funding, expertise and technical support to the International Team for Implantology Foundation (ITI). Although Dr. Cláudio R. Leles received a grant from ITI to conduct the study, the views expressed in this study are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy of the ITI Foundation or the Straumman Company. This funding source had no role in the study design and had no role in data analysis, data interpretation, or the decision to submit results. Dr. Shahrokh Esfandiari is an ITI Fellow. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Tags