JDR JDR Most Read Articles
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (18)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Timmerman, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Waas, M.A.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Timmerman, R.
Right arrow Articles by van Waas, M.A.J.
J Dent Res 83(8): 630-633, 2004
© 2004 International and American Associations for Dental Research


RESEARCH REPORT
Clinical

An Eight-year Follow-up to a Randomized Clinical Trial of Participant Satisfaction with Three Types of Mandibular Implant-retained Overdentures

R. Timmerman1,2, G.T. Stoker1,2,3, D. Wismeijer2, P. Oosterveld1, J.I.J.F. Vermeeren2, and M.A.J. van Waas1

1 Free University, Department of Oral Function. Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam, Dental School;
2 Amphia Teaching Hospital, Department of Special Dental Care and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Breda, The Netherlands;

3 corresponding author, Hogeweg 5, NL-3212 LG Simonshaven, The Netherlands, geertstoker{at}wxs.nl

Studies have shown that mandibular implant overdentures significantly increase satisfaction and quality of life of edentulous elders. Improved chewing ability appears to have a positive impact on nutritional state. Therefore, it is important to determine the best design of this prosthesis over the long term. In this randomized controlled trial, three groups of edentulous participants with atrophic mandibles wore 3 types of implant overdentures. During an eight-year follow-up, only seven of the 110 participants had dropped out of this study. Almost all participants were still satisfied with their overdentures. Participant satisfaction concerning retention and stability of the mandibular overdenture had decreased significantly in the two-implant ball attachment group, whereas the opinion of participants in the single- and triple-bar groups was still at the same level. The long-term results suggest that a mandibular overdenture retained by 2 implants with a single bar may be the best treatment strategy for edentulous people with atrophic ridges.

KEY WORDS: randomized controlled clinical trial • participant satisfaction • implant-retained overdentures • treatment strategies • long-term research




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Dent. Res.Home page
J. de Lange, A.V. van Gool, G. Stoker, D. Wismeijer, and R. van Waas
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
J. Dent. Res., October 1, 2007; 86(10): 920 - 921.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Dent. Res.Home page
G.T. Stoker, D. Wismeijer, and M.A.J. van Waas
An Eight-year Follow-up to a Randomized Clinical Trial of Aftercare and Cost-analysis with Three Types of Mandibular Implant-retained Overdentures
J. Dent. Res., March 1, 2007; 86(3): 276 - 280.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
IADR Journals Advances in Dental Research ®
Journal of Dental Research ® Critical Reviews (1990-2004)
Copyright © 2004 Institutional Access Guidelines