Implant Retained Overdenture VERSUS Implant Canine Retained Overdenture.

Mansoura University

Status: Completed

Conditions: Oral Health Impact Profile Short Version 14 (OHIP 14)

Treatments: Other: implant retained overdenture prosthesis; Other: implant canine retained overdenture prosthesis

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT07046104

A0103024RP

Details and patient eligibility

About

ABSTRACT Background: mandibular class 1 modification 1 RPD can be retained by mesially placed implant only, or canines can be used to share in retention using telescopic attachment. So, the aim of this clinical study is to evaluate patient satisfaction and oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) for implant retained Overdenture versus implant-tooth retained Overdenture.

Methods: This clinical cross-over study included 10 partially edentulous patients with only remaining mandibular canines. Every patient received two mandibular implants at the 1st premolar region. Two mandibular implant retained overdenture will be constructed, opposing a maxillary single denture. One of the dentures was made with a design based on implant retention only but the other denture was made with dual implant-tooth retention design. The effects of each overdenture design were evaluated after 3 months. patients indicated satisfaction with their prosthesis using a visual analog scale (VAS)Regarding VAS, participants were asked to score their answer according to the amount of satisfaction on a 100 mm line (Score 0 = no satisfaction at all and score 100 = complete satisfaction). The questions cover several items related to overdentures such as retention, stability, comfort, ease of cleaning, ease of speaking, ease of chewing, limited activities due to embarrassment, quality of bolus, and appearance. , and oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) was recorded for both prostheses. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was done to compare the statistically significant difference between the two groups. SPSS ver.23. P <.05 was considered significant.

Enrollment: 10 patients

Sex: All

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• This research will be done on patients who were previously received 2 mesially placed implants in the 1st premolar region with only two remaining mandibular canines with opposing maxillary single denture

Exclusion criteria

• uncontrolled diabetic patients

Trial design

Primary purpose: Treatment

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Crossover Assignment

Masking: None (Open label)

---

10 participants in 2 patient groups

implant retained group

Active Comparator group

Description:

two implants in molar position and two remaining canines

Treatment:

Other: implant retained overdenture prosthesis

implant tooth retained group

Active Comparator group

Description:

implant in molar position and two remaining canines

Treatment:

Other: implant canine retained overdenture prosthesis