Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34481474›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2021

General health, healthcare costs and dental care use of elderly with a natural dentition, implant-retained overdenture or conventional denture: an 8-year cohort of Dutch elderly (aged 75 and over).

Mieke H Bakker, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M Raghoebar, Lilian L Peters, Anita Visser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mieke H BakkerDepartment of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, the Netherlands. m.h.bakker@umcg.nl.
Arjan VissinkDepartment of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Gerry M RaghoebarDepartment of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Lilian L PetersDepartment of General Practice & Elderly Care Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9700 RB, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Anita VisserDepartment of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, the Netherlands.
University of Groningen · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCross-sectional studies have shown that elderly with a natural dentition have better general health than edentulous elderly, but this has not been confirmed in studies with longitudinal design.

methodsThis prospective longitudinal study with a follow-up of 8 years aimed to assess differences in general health, healthcare costs and dental care use between elderly with a natural dentition and edentulous elderly wearing implant-retained or conventional dentures. Based on data of all national insurance claims for dental and medical care from Dutch elderly (aged ≥75 years) general health outcomes (chronic conditions, medication use), healthcare costs and dental care use could be assessed of three groups of elderly, viz. elderly with a natural dentition, elderly with conventional dentures and elderly with implant-retained overdentures.

resultsAt baseline (2009), a total of 168,122 elderly could be included (143,199 natural dentition, 18,420 conventional dentures, 6503 implant-retained overdentures). Here we showed that after 8 years follow-up elderly with a natural dentition had more favorable general health outcomes (fewer chronic conditions, less medication use), lower healthcare costs and lower dental costs - but higher dental care use - than edentulous elderly. At baseline the general health of elderly with an implant-retained overdentures resembled the profile of elderly with a natural dentition, but over time their general health problems became comparable to elderly with conventional dentures.

conclusionsIt was concluded that elderly with a natural dentition had significant better health and lower healthcare costs compared to edentulous elderly (with or without dental implants).

Indexed as

DentitionDenture, OverlayAgedCross-Sectional StudiesDental CareHealth Care CostsHumansLongitudinal StudiesPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesCommunity-dwelling elderlyEdentulousHealthy ageingNatural dentitionOral health

Identifiers

PMID34481474
PMCPMC8418734
OpenAlexW3197140578

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.