ArticleBMC research notes2024
Single versus two dental implants retained mandibular over dentures: comparison of function, patient satisfaction, oral health-related quality of life and success of treatment.
Article in BMC research notes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric Validation of the Macedonian-Language Version of the Ultrashort Five-Item Oral Health Impact Profile in the North Macedonian Population (OHIP5-MAC).Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of prosthetic rehabilitation of edentulous patients using conventional complete dentures (CD), single median dental implant retained over dentures (SIMOD) with over dentures retained by two dental implants (TIMOD).
methodsThirty completely edentulous patients (fifteen each arm) presented to the Faculty of Dental Sciences, University of Peradeniya were randomly selected for the SIMOD or TIMOD groups. Patients were initially provided with CD. Surgical implant placement and prosthetic procedures were conducted at the Faculty of Dental Sciences. Osseointergration was confirmed, healing caps and then ball attachments were fixed on the implants. Clinical outcome was assessed by clinician, patient, and oral health related quality of life (OHRQOL) using OHIP-14 scale. Data were analyzed using Minitab P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant level.
resultsPatient comfort, esthetics, chewing, speech, general satisfaction, denture retention, stability, and support with TIMOD & SIMOD had been significantly increased than CD (p < 0.05) at 3, 6 months, and 1 year review. OHIP-14 scale showed statistically significant improved oral health related quality of life with SIMOD and TIMOD compared to CD.
conclusionSIMOD & TIMOD have improved outcome assessed by the patient and clinician and OHRQOL of the individual than CD. SIMOD can also be considered for successful management of completely edentulous patients.
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.