Trial reportClinical oral investigations2022
Incidence and risk factors for non-adaptation of new mandibular complete dentures: a clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Time-dependent adaptation and clinical efficacy of complete dentures: evidence from a Bayesian mixed-effects model.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation of The Indonesian Version Functional Assessment of Denture Instrument as a Measuring Tool for Complete Denture Functional Quality.European journal of dentistry · 2025Article
- Can Different Impression Techniques Affect the Chewing Efficiency of Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdentures?Brazilian dental journal · 2024Article
- Case Report: single low-dose of denosumab as a trigger of MRONJ development in a patient with osteoporosis after bisphosphonate therapy.Frontiers in oral health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the incidence and risk factors for non-adaptation of the conventional mandibular complete denture (CMCD). MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 108 edentulous patients were rehabilitated with complete dentures (CDs) and followed up at 3- and 6-month intervals. Adaptation was confirmed based on chewing, phonetics, and comfortable swallowing with the CDs. The risk factors among sociodemographic and patient-centered factors were analyzed. Statistical analyses included the chi-square test and then a multivariate analysis.
resultsAfter 3 months, 38.0% of patients showed non-adaptation to CMCDs. Non-adaptation was significantly associated with the absence of previous mandibular denture experience (p = 0.042), ulcerations after 15 days of rehabilitation (p < 0.001), and a reduced posterior mandibular ridge (p = 0.035). After 6 months, this incidence decreased to 14.1%. The factors associated with non-adaptation were ulcerative lesions after 15 (p < 0.001) and 30 (p < 0.001) days of the delivery of CDs and the non-regular use of mandibular CDs (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe incidence of non-adaptation was higher after 3 months, with reduction after 6 months. Sociodemographic variables did not influence the adaptation. After 3 months, the absence of previous experience, traumatic ulcers, and reduced mandibular ridges hindered the adaptation of patients to mandibular CDs. After 6 months, only the occurrence of ulcerative lesions and non-regular wear of dentures were risk factors for non-adaptation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A considerable number of patients have difficulties in adapting to the mandibular dentures. Identifying the factors of non-adaptation of the dentures will contribute to increasing the predictability of this critical adaptation period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.