ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Patient-Reported Satisfaction and Functional Outcomes with Implant-Supported Overdentures versus Conventional Complete Dentures.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2025. 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.
- Effect of Connection Geometry and Cantilever Length on the Mechanical Behavior of Ti6Al4V and PEEK Bar-Supported Implant Prostheses with Angled Abutments.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Prosthetic complications of implant-supported overdentures: a retrospective study on the influence of attachment type and implant number.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Assessment of Patient Satisfaction and Masticatory Efficiency with Implant-Supported Overdentures Versus Conventional Dentures.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The choice between implant-supported overdentures and conventional complete dentures plays a significant role in patient satisfaction and functional outcomes. Implant-supported overdentures are increasingly used due to their stability, comfort, and improved chewing efficiency. This study aims to evaluate the differences in patient-reported satisfaction and functional outcomes between these two types of prostheses. Methods: A cohort of 150 edentulous patients was evaluated using either implant-supported overdentures or conventional complete dentures. Patients completed a satisfaction questionnaire, and masticatory function was assessed through standardized masticatory performance tests. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and comparative analysis. Results: Patients with implant-supported overdentures reported significantly higher satisfaction, particularly in comfort, stability, and chewing ability. Masticatory efficiency was also notably better in the implant group. However, conventional dentures showed adequate results in terms of cost and accessibility. Conclusion: Implant-supported overdentures offer superior satisfaction and functional outcomes compared to conventional complete dentures, making them a preferred option for long-term edentulous rehabilitation.
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.