Dergiler / 7tepe Klinik / 2020 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1

Comparison of the effects of two different types of retainers used in implant-supported overdenture prosthesis on patient satisfaction

İmplant destekli hareketli protezlerde kullanılan iki farklı tutucu tipinin hastaların memnuniyetleri üzerine etkilerinin karşılaştırılması

Sayfa
74–80
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: Based on the satisfaction scores of IOD, it was concluded that it had a positive effect on the quality of life of the patients, which remained unaffected by the retainer type and factors like gender and age.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aim: This study aimed to investigate the effects of two different types of retainers, i.e., the locator system and ball attachment, on patient satisfaction, in patients using conventional complete denture in the maxilla and two implant-supported overdentures (IOD) in the mandible.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Material and Methods: This study was carried out in 113 patients using ten questions selected from the OHIP–49 questionnaire.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: Based on the satisfaction scores of IOD, it was concluded that it had a positive effect on the quality of life of the patients, which remained unaffected by the retainer type and factors like gender and age.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Aim: This study aimed to investigate the effects of two different types of retainers, i.e., the locator system and ball attachment, on patient satisfaction, in patients using conventional complete denture in the maxilla and two implant-supported overdentures (IOD) in the mandible. Material and Methods: This study was carried out in 113 patients using ten questions selected from the OHIP–49 questionnaire. The patients were divided into ball attachment (BALL) and locator (LOC) group according to the retainer type used in their IOD prostheses, and their effects on patient satisfaction were evaluated. Also, changes in satisfaction levels were examined in terms of gender and age. The data were then analyzed statistically. Results: All the 113 study participants were found to be satisfied with IODs, regardless of age and sex, with a score of 10.5 (±7.5) out of 40 points, which was the highest dissatisfaction score. Of the 55 patients (10.07 ±7.94) in the BALL group and 58 patients (10.91 ±7.19) evaluated in the LOC group, no statistically significant difference was observed on the basis of the retainer type in terms of general satisfaction and factors like age and sex. Conclusion: Based on the satisfaction scores of IOD, it was concluded that it had a positive effect on the quality of life of the patients, which remained unaffected by the retainer type and factors like gender and age.

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, üst çenede konvansiyonel total protez ve alt çenede 2 implant destekli hareketli protez (IDO) kullanan hastaların, IDO protezlerden genel memnuniyetlerinin ve en sık kullanılan tutucu tiplerinden olan locator sistem ve ball ataşmanların, bu memnuniyet üzerine etkilerinin araştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Yapılan bu araştırmada, 113 hastanın katılımıyla, OHIP-49 testi sorularından seçilen 10 sorudan yararlanılarak, üst çenede konvansiyonel tam protez, alt çenede IDO kullanan hastaların, öncelikle IDO protezlerinden genel memnuniyetleri ve ardından hastaların tutucu tiplerine göre ball ataşman (BALL) ve locator grubu (LOC) olarak ayrılmasıyla, bu iki tutucu tipinin hastaların memnuniyetleri üzerindeki etkileri değerlendirilmiştir. Ayrıca her iki koşulda cinsiyet ve yaş faktörlerine göre bu memnuniyetlerdeki değişimler incelenmiştir. Elde edilen veriler istatistiksel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: Çalışmaya katılan 113 hastanın yaş ve cinsiyet faktörlerinden bağımsız olarak, genel anlamda IDO’lardan, en yüksek memnuniyetsizlik puanı olan 40 puan üzerinden 10,5 (±7,5) puan ile memnun olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Tutucu tipine göre değerlendirme yapıldığında; BALL grubunda 55 hastada elde edilen 10,07 ± 7,94 ve LOC grubunda 58 hastada elde edilen 10,91 ± 7,19 memnuniyet skorlarına göre, tutucu tipinin hem genel hem de yaş-cinsiyet faktörlerine göre ayrı ayrı değerlendirildiğinde, hasta memnuniyetleri açısından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark oluşmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç: Bu çalışmanın sınırları dahilinde, IDO protezlerin yarattıkları memnuniyet skorlarına göre, hastaların yaşam kaliteleri üzerinde olumlu etkisinin olduğu ve bu memnuniyetin kullanılan tutucu tipinden ve cinsiyet-yaş faktörlerinden etkilenmediği sonucuna varılmıştır.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KÜÇÜKKURT, S., ÖZTÜRK, Ç. (2020). Comparison of the effects of two different types of retainers used in implant-supported overdenture prosthesis on patient satisfaction. 7tepe Klinik, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1, 74–80. https://ajindex.com/articles/141558

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. Kutkut A, Bertoli E, Frazer R, Pinto-Sinai G, Fuentealba Hidalgo R, Studts J. A systematic review of studies comparing conventional complete denture and implant retained overdenture. J Prosthodont Res 2018; 62: 1-9
  2. Sharma AJ, Nagrath R, Lahori M. A comparative evaluation of chewing efficiency, masticatory bite force, and patient satisfaction between conventional denture and implant-supported mandibular overdenture: An in vivo study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2017; 17: 361-72
  3. Cardoso RG, Melo LA, Barbosa GA, Calderon PD, Germano AR, Mestriner WJ, et al. Impact of mandibular conventional denture and overdenture on quality of life and masticatory efficiency. Braz Oral Res 2016; 30: e102
  4. British Society for the Study of Prosthetic D. The York consensus statement on implant-supported overdentures. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2009; 17: 164-165
  5. Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Gerodontology 2002; 19: 3-4
  6. Warreth A, Alkadhimi AF, Sultan A, Byrne C, Woods E. Mandibular implant-supported overdentures: attachment systems, and number and locations of implants-- Part I. J Ir Dent Assoc 2015; 61: 93-97
  7. Warreth A, Byrne C, Alkadhimi AF, Woods E, Sultan A. Mandibular implant-supported overdentures: attachment systems, and number and locations of implants-- Part II. J Ir Dent Assoc 2015; 61: 144-148
  8. El-Anwar MI, El-Taftazany EA, Hamed HA, ElHay MAA. Influence of Number of Implants and Attachment Type on Stress Distribution in Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdentures: Finite Element Analysis. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2017; 5: 244-249
  9. Choi JW, Bae JH, Jeong CM, Huh JB. Retention and wear behaviors of two implant overdenture stud-type attachments at different implant angulations. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117: 628-635
  10. Arat Bilhan S, Baykasoglu C, Bilhan H, Kutay O, Mugan A. Effect of attachment types and number of implants supporting mandibular overdentures on stress distribution: a computed tomography-based 3D finite element analysis. J Biomech 2015; 48: 130-137
  11. Cicciu M, Cervino G, Bramanti E, Lauritano F, Lo Gudice G, Scappaticci L, et al. FEM Analysis of Mandibular Prosthetic Overdenture Supported by Dental Implants: Evaluation of Different Retention Methods. Comput Math Methods Med 2015; 2015: 943839
  12. Kronstrom M, Carlsson GE. An International Su