IADR Abstract Archives
Impact of the Prosthetic Design on the Quality of Life
Objectives: To compare implant-retained overdentures, screwed fixed partial prostheses, and cemented fixed partial prostheses concerning their impact on the patients’ oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and also according to sociodemographic, peri-implant, and prosthetic-related variables.
Methods: A total of 143 edentulous patients were assigned to the following groups depending on their type of prosthetic rehabilitation: Group-1 (IO; n= 43): Implant-retained overdentures; Group-2 (S-PD; n= 50): Screwed implant-supported partial dentures; and Group-3 (C-PD; n= 50): Cemented implant-supported partial dentures. Patients completed three validated OHRQoL scales (OHIP-14sp, OHIP-20sp, and QoLIP-10). Data related to socio-demographics; prostheses’ features; peri-implant health; and prosthetic complications, aesthetics, and functionality, were gathered. Descriptive and parametric probes were used (alpha = 0.05).
Results: Among the peri-implant variables, the values of Plaque index and Peri-implant mucosal hyperplasia were significantly lower for both the S-PD and C-PD groups with respect to the IO group. The C-PD group recorded the significantly highest Implant mobility. The assessed-by-the-patient variables: Aesthetics, Function, and Global evaluation, showed the significantly worst values in the case of the IO group. The other prosthetic variables yielded no significant differences among groups. The most common complication was Ceramic fracture (30%), followed by Unsatisfactory occlusion (16.1%). Finally, 85.3% of the subjects suffered from some kind of impact on OHRQoL. Both the OHIP-14sp and the OHIP-20sp indices attributed significantly better QoL to the fixed prosthodontic groups. The QoLIP-10 detected no significant differences among groups. The domains of the OHIP questionnaires that identified the highest impacts on OHRQoL were: `Functional Limitation’, `Physical pain’, `Psychological discomfort’, and `Physical disability’. When using the QoLIP-10 scale, the `Dento-facial aesthetics’ dimension achieved the highest impact.
Conclusions: Although more research is necessary, fixed implant-supported partial prostheses seem to supply superior OHRQoL and clinical behaviour than implant-retained overdentures; including better peri-implant health, aesthetic appearance, and functionality.
Methods: A total of 143 edentulous patients were assigned to the following groups depending on their type of prosthetic rehabilitation: Group-1 (IO; n= 43): Implant-retained overdentures; Group-2 (S-PD; n= 50): Screwed implant-supported partial dentures; and Group-3 (C-PD; n= 50): Cemented implant-supported partial dentures. Patients completed three validated OHRQoL scales (OHIP-14sp, OHIP-20sp, and QoLIP-10). Data related to socio-demographics; prostheses’ features; peri-implant health; and prosthetic complications, aesthetics, and functionality, were gathered. Descriptive and parametric probes were used (alpha = 0.05).
Results: Among the peri-implant variables, the values of Plaque index and Peri-implant mucosal hyperplasia were significantly lower for both the S-PD and C-PD groups with respect to the IO group. The C-PD group recorded the significantly highest Implant mobility. The assessed-by-the-patient variables: Aesthetics, Function, and Global evaluation, showed the significantly worst values in the case of the IO group. The other prosthetic variables yielded no significant differences among groups. The most common complication was Ceramic fracture (30%), followed by Unsatisfactory occlusion (16.1%). Finally, 85.3% of the subjects suffered from some kind of impact on OHRQoL. Both the OHIP-14sp and the OHIP-20sp indices attributed significantly better QoL to the fixed prosthodontic groups. The QoLIP-10 detected no significant differences among groups. The domains of the OHIP questionnaires that identified the highest impacts on OHRQoL were: `Functional Limitation’, `Physical pain’, `Psychological discomfort’, and `Physical disability’. When using the QoLIP-10 scale, the `Dento-facial aesthetics’ dimension achieved the highest impact.
Conclusions: Although more research is necessary, fixed implant-supported partial prostheses seem to supply superior OHRQoL and clinical behaviour than implant-retained overdentures; including better peri-implant health, aesthetic appearance, and functionality.