Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30304120›Full record

Trial reportJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2018

One-year prospective clinical study comparing patient satisfaction and masticatory performance of mandibular overdentures supported by one versus two implants.

André Gustavo Paleari, Norberto Martins de Oliveira Junior, Danny Omar Mendoza Marin, Larissa Santana Rodriguez, João Neudenir Arioli Filho, Ana Carolina Pero, Marco Antonio Compagnoni

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

André Gustavo PaleariUniversidade Federal de Alfenas, Faculdade de Odontologia, Departamento de Odontologia Restauradora, Alfenas, Minas Gerais, Brasil.
Norberto Martins de Oliveira JuniorUniv. Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brasil.
Danny Omar Mendoza MarinUniv. Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brasil.
Larissa Santana RodriguezUniv. Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brasil.
João Neudenir Arioli FilhoUniv. Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brasil.
Ana Carolina PeroUniv. Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brasil.
Marco Antonio CompagnoniUniv. Estadual Paulista, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brasil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThere is a lack of clinical evidence on mandibular overdentures (MOD) supported by a single implant. To compare patient satisfaction and masticatory performance in MOD supported by one versus two implants in a two-group parallel randomized clinical trial. MATERIAL AND

methodsTwenty-one patients wearing new maxillary and mandibular complete dentures (CDs) were randomly divided to receive one (GI, n = 11) or two (GII, n = 10) implants in the mandibular arch. Four months after implant placement, o-ring abutments were installed in the implants, and matrix attachments were placed in the lower complete dentures. Patient satisfaction with their dentures and masticatory performance were compared at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. Data on patient satisfaction were analyzed using the Friedman test and the Mann-Whitney U test. Data on masticatory performance were analyzed using one-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student's t test (α=0.05).

resultsBoth groups exhibited a significant increase in overall patient satisfaction in all periods evaluated (p<0.05), except for GI after 12 months, which had values similar to baseline (p=0.74). Satisfaction levels of GI and GII were similar at baseline, 3 and 6 months, but GII showed higher satisfaction levels (p=0.01) than GI at 12 months. GI and GII exhibited a significant increase (p<0.05) in masticatory performance for all periods relative to baseline. However, GII had higher masticatory performance with dentures than GI, regardless of the period (p<0.05).

conclusionMOD supported by two implants demonstrated better patient satisfaction in the follow-up at 12 months and better masticatory performance than MOD supported by one implant.

Indexed as

Denture, Complete, LowerDenture, OverlayPatient SatisfactionAgedAnalysis of VarianceDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedDenture RetentionFemaleHumansMaleMandibleMasticationMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsStatistics, Nonparametric

Identifiers

PMID30304120
PMCPMC6172020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.