ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Within-subject assessment of swallowing threshold and efficiency for maxillary implant assisted overdentures with and without palatal coverage.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesControversy remains regarding the impact of palatal coverage or palatless designs for maxillary implant overdentures. This within subject study aimed to compare the swallowing threshold and efficiency of maxillary implant assisted overdentures with and without palatal coverage. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 14 healthy completely edentulous subjects with ages ranged from 50 to 70 years. For each participants, four dental implants were inserted in the canines and premolars areas of the maxillary arch, and two implants in the canines region of the mandibular arch. Two designs of maxillary implant-assisted overdentures (with and without palatal covreage designs) and one design of mandibular implant overdenture were constructed for each patient. The overdentures were retained to the implants by using locator attachments. Swallowing threshold and efficiency were evaluated using Test of Mastication and Swallowing Solids (TOMASS). Swallowing evaluation was conducted 3 months after each maxillary implant overdenture design insertion, while the participants were eating solid food. Independent samples t-test was used to compare the differences between the two overdenture designs.
resultsThere was statistically significant reduction in swallowing threshold, number of swallows, number of masticatory cycles, and total ingestion time for the maxillary implant overdenture without palatal coverage (p < 0.05). However, there was non-significant difference in the number of bites between the two maxillary implant overdenture designs (p > 0.05).
conclusionWithin the limitation of this study, it could be concluded that maxillary implant overdenture without palatal coverage improves chewing and swallowing efficiency for solid food. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Palatal coverage with maxillary implant overdenture negatively affected bolus formation during oral food processing. Increased chewing cycles and time of mastication lead to increase the viscosity of the bolus, which might cause aspiration during swallowing. Maxillary implant overdenture without palatal coverage may be a viable treatment option as it improve the oral food processing for safe swallowing. In addition, TOMASS test is easy to be incorporated as part of the clinical evaluation of swallowing efficiency for solid foods processing.
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.