Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31944417›Full record

ArticleClinical oral implants research2020

Masticatory performance and oral health-related quality of life in edentulous maxillectomy patients: A cross-sectional study to compare implant-supported obturators and conventional obturators.

Doke J M Buurman, Caroline M Speksnijder, Britt H B T Engelen, Peter Kessler

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Impact of rehabilitation with dental implants on the quality of life of patients undergoing maxillofacial reconstruction: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Doke J M BuurmanDepartment of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2521-5003
Caroline M SpeksnijderDepartment of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0540-3741
Britt H B T EngelenDepartment of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Peter KesslerDepartment of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6771-1374
Maastricht University Medical Centre · NLUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare the masticatory performance and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of edentulous maxillectomy patients with and without implant-supported obturator prostheses. MATERIAL AND

methodsNineteen edentulous maxillectomy patients with completed prosthetic obturator treatment in the upper jaw participated in this study. In nine patients, the obturator prosthesis was supported by implants in the remaining bone of the midface and/or skull base to improve retention. Masticatory performance was measured objectively by the mixing ability test (MAT) and subjectively by three OHRQoL questionnaires: (a) the Oral Health Impact Profile for EDENTulous people (OHIP-EDENT), (b) the Obturator Function Scale (OFS), and (c) the Dutch Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire version 3 (LORQv3-NL). The independent t test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used to test for differences in outcomes of patients with and without implant-retention of their obturator prostheses.

resultsPatients with implant-supported obturator prostheses had significantly better masticatory and oral function, reported fewer chewing difficulties, and had less discomfort during food intake than did patients with a conventional obturator.

conclusionSupporting prosthetic obturators after maxillectomy with implants improve oral functioning, chewing, and eating comfort. This treatment modality is a viable technique to improve the functionality of prosthetic rehabilitation in patients who have undergone maxillectomy.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsQuality of LifeCross-Sectional StudiesDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedHumansOral HealthPalatal ObturatorsDental Implantsdental implantmasticationmaxillary defectmaxillofacial reconstructionmidfacial defectobturatorquality of life

Identifiers

PMID31944417
PMCPMC7319476
OpenAlexW3000190570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.