Oral health self-perception, maximum bite force and masticatory efficiency in patients with overdentures with different attachment systems—A crossover study
Amanda Laísa de Oliveira Lima, Camila Luiz Jabr, Cibele Oliveira de Melo Rocha, Lucas Portela Oliveira, Rafael Antonio de Oliveira Ribeiro, Francisco de Assis Mollo Júnior, João Neudenir Arioli Filho
{"title":"Oral health self-perception, maximum bite force and masticatory efficiency in patients with overdentures with different attachment systems—A crossover study","authors":"Amanda Laísa de Oliveira Lima, Camila Luiz Jabr, Cibele Oliveira de Melo Rocha, Lucas Portela Oliveira, Rafael Antonio de Oliveira Ribeiro, Francisco de Assis Mollo Júnior, João Neudenir Arioli Filho","doi":"10.1111/joor.13825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The literature is unclear about how the different attachment systems for overdentures impact the maximum bite force, the masticatory efficiency and how this impact in the oral health self-perception in patients.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate the effect of two attachment systems (O-ring and Locator) for mandibular overdenture using single implant on quality of life, maximum bite force (BF) and masticatory efficiency (ME).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty-eight completely edentulous denture wearers with a mandibular symphysis implant were randomly selected and allocated into two groups in a crossover study, considering O-ring and Locator attachment types. The quality of life and self-perception of oral health were assessed using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-Edent) and Geriatric Index of Determination of Oral Health (GOHAI) questionnaires, respectively. BF was measured using a gnathodynamometer and ME by chewing silicone cubes and almonds in different numbers of cycles.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>There was no difference between the attachment systems about self-perceived oral health and impact on quality of life (<i>p</i> > .05). The O-ring-type system obtained a significantly higher BF than the locator-type system (<i>p</i> = .04). Regardless of the food chewed, no statistically significant difference was observed with the type of attachment (<i>p</i> > .05). The ME was directly proportional to the masticatory cycles only for almonds (<i>p</i> < .01).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Locator and O-ring inserts had a similar impact on patients' quality of life, self-perception of oral health and ME. Additionally, the O-ring system exhibited superior properties in the BF.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16605,"journal":{"name":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","volume":"51 11","pages":"2354-2360"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joor.13825","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
The literature is unclear about how the different attachment systems for overdentures impact the maximum bite force, the masticatory efficiency and how this impact in the oral health self-perception in patients.
Objective
To evaluate the effect of two attachment systems (O-ring and Locator) for mandibular overdenture using single implant on quality of life, maximum bite force (BF) and masticatory efficiency (ME).
Methods
Twenty-eight completely edentulous denture wearers with a mandibular symphysis implant were randomly selected and allocated into two groups in a crossover study, considering O-ring and Locator attachment types. The quality of life and self-perception of oral health were assessed using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-Edent) and Geriatric Index of Determination of Oral Health (GOHAI) questionnaires, respectively. BF was measured using a gnathodynamometer and ME by chewing silicone cubes and almonds in different numbers of cycles.
Results
There was no difference between the attachment systems about self-perceived oral health and impact on quality of life (p > .05). The O-ring-type system obtained a significantly higher BF than the locator-type system (p = .04). Regardless of the food chewed, no statistically significant difference was observed with the type of attachment (p > .05). The ME was directly proportional to the masticatory cycles only for almonds (p < .01).
Conclusions
Locator and O-ring inserts had a similar impact on patients' quality of life, self-perception of oral health and ME. Additionally, the O-ring system exhibited superior properties in the BF.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation aims to be the most prestigious journal of dental research within all aspects of oral rehabilitation and applied oral physiology. It covers all diagnostic and clinical management aspects necessary to re-establish a subjective and objective harmonious oral function.
Oral rehabilitation may become necessary as a result of developmental or acquired disturbances in the orofacial region, orofacial traumas, or a variety of dental and oral diseases (primarily dental caries and periodontal diseases) and orofacial pain conditions. As such, oral rehabilitation in the twenty-first century is a matter of skilful diagnosis and minimal, appropriate intervention, the nature of which is intimately linked to a profound knowledge of oral physiology, oral biology, and dental and oral pathology.
The scientific content of the journal therefore strives to reflect the best of evidence-based clinical dentistry. Modern clinical management should be based on solid scientific evidence gathered about diagnostic procedures and the properties and efficacy of the chosen intervention (e.g. material science, biological, toxicological, pharmacological or psychological aspects). The content of the journal also reflects documentation of the possible side-effects of rehabilitation, and includes prognostic perspectives of the treatment modalities chosen.