ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
The effect of bioelectric and manual impressions on quality of complete dentures and quality of life: A cross over pilot study.
Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A randomized clinical trial comparing retention of complete dentures and oral health quality of life of patients with conventional and bioelectric impressions.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the quality of complete dentures and quality of life of participants rehabilitated by using TENS (Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation) facilitated impression making with manual impressions. Material and methods: Ten completely edentulous participants were enrolled in the crossover, pilot study. Participants were randomized in 2 groups. Five participants in each group were rehabilitated by dentures fabricated with TENS facilitated definitive impression technique (group T) and conventional impression technique (group C). In group T, Bioelectric border molding was done for the participants, that uses electric stimulation of the nerves supplying the muscles. In group C, incremental border molding using modeling plastic impression compound was carried out. Participants in each group used the dentures for 3 months. After 3 months, OHIP-EDENT questionnaire responses were obtained from the participants to observe the oral health related quality of life. A dental specialist recorded denture quality by Kapur scoring criteria. After one month wash period, the treatment was swapped between the groups. OHIP-EDENT scores and Kapur score were recorded for the alternate dentures after 3 months of use. Descriptive analysis was followed by Mann Whitney test to compare the overall scores between group T and group C for OHIP-EDENT, the scores for individual domains of OHIP-EDENT, and Kapur score for denture evaluation (α = 0.05). Results: The overall OHIP-EDENT scores within each domain were less in group T when compared with the scores in group C and Kapur score for group T was more than group C. The difference was statistically significant i.e. Conclusions: Less OHIP-EDENT scores in group T imply better perception of quality of life of individuals due to better performance of stomatognathic system. The higher Kapur scores in group T signifies better quality of dentures when TENS was used for definitive impression making.
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.