Patient satisfaction among subjects with a maxillary single denture, treated with implant-supported telescopic versus ball-and-socket overdentures: A randomized controlled trial.
Sherihan Hanafy Salem, Ali Abdulghani AlSourori, Marwa Hassan Mostafa
{"title":"Patient satisfaction among subjects with a maxillary single denture, treated with implant-supported telescopic versus ball-and-socket overdentures: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Sherihan Hanafy Salem, Ali Abdulghani AlSourori, Marwa Hassan Mostafa","doi":"10.17219/dmp/169186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The present study was performed to rehabilitate maxillary single denture cases with implantretained telescopic or ball-and-socket attachments, and to evaluate the validity of two-implantretained maxillary overdentures as a treatment approach in the maxillary arch.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of the present study was to evaluate patient satisfaction in maxillary single denture wearers with 2 different attachment systems (telescopic attachment vs. ball-and-socket attachment).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A total of 18 completely edentulous maxillary ridge patients (45-60 years old; mean age: 53 years) were selected for this study. Maxillary single dentures were constructed for all the patients. Group 1 patients received 2 implants with a telescopic attachment and group 2 patients received 2 implants with a ball-and-socket attachment. Patient satisfaction with the implant-retained maxillary single denture was evaluated after insertion, and 3 months after the delivery of each implant-retained maxillary single overdenture.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 18 patients completed the study. After 3 months, the telescopic group showed significant improvement in terms of comfort, chewing, handling, and overall satisfaction, and in the ball-and-socket group, significant improvement was recorded for appearance only. When comparing the 2 groups, after insertion, group 1 showed significantly better results for the 'handling' and 'hygiene' parameters, whereas group 2 showed a significantly better mean score for the 'appearance' parameter. After 3 months, group 1 showed significantly better results for the 'comfort', 'handling', 'hygiene', and 'overall satisfaction' parameters, and group 1 proved significantly better in terms of 'appearance' and 'speech' parameters.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Maxillary single dentures with a telescopic attachment showed an advantage over those with a ball-and-socket attachment regarding patient satisfaction. Concerning the implant number, twoimplantretained maxillary overdentures can be considered a promising approach for patients from developing countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":11191,"journal":{"name":"Dental and Medical Problems","volume":"61 6","pages":"821-828"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dental and Medical Problems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17219/dmp/169186","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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 present study was performed to rehabilitate maxillary single denture cases with implantretained telescopic or ball-and-socket attachments, and to evaluate the validity of two-implantretained maxillary overdentures as a treatment approach in the maxillary arch.
Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate patient satisfaction in maxillary single denture wearers with 2 different attachment systems (telescopic attachment vs. ball-and-socket attachment).
Material and methods: A total of 18 completely edentulous maxillary ridge patients (45-60 years old; mean age: 53 years) were selected for this study. Maxillary single dentures were constructed for all the patients. Group 1 patients received 2 implants with a telescopic attachment and group 2 patients received 2 implants with a ball-and-socket attachment. Patient satisfaction with the implant-retained maxillary single denture was evaluated after insertion, and 3 months after the delivery of each implant-retained maxillary single overdenture.
Results: All 18 patients completed the study. After 3 months, the telescopic group showed significant improvement in terms of comfort, chewing, handling, and overall satisfaction, and in the ball-and-socket group, significant improvement was recorded for appearance only. When comparing the 2 groups, after insertion, group 1 showed significantly better results for the 'handling' and 'hygiene' parameters, whereas group 2 showed a significantly better mean score for the 'appearance' parameter. After 3 months, group 1 showed significantly better results for the 'comfort', 'handling', 'hygiene', and 'overall satisfaction' parameters, and group 1 proved significantly better in terms of 'appearance' and 'speech' parameters.
Conclusions: Maxillary single dentures with a telescopic attachment showed an advantage over those with a ball-and-socket attachment regarding patient satisfaction. Concerning the implant number, twoimplantretained maxillary overdentures can be considered a promising approach for patients from developing countries.