Patient Evaluation of Treatment with Fixed Prostheses Supported by Implants or a Combination of Teeth and Implants
- 2 September 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Prosthodontics
- Vol. 13 (3), 160-165
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849x.2004.04027.x
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare treatment outcomes among subjects with complete arch fixed prostheses in the maxilla, supported by implants or a combination of natural teeth and dental implants. Twenty-one subjects with maxillary tooth- and implant-supported fixed prostheses and 21 subjects with maxillary implant-supported fixed prostheses were identified and included in the study. All abutment teeth in the group with tooth- and implant-supported prostheses were provided with cemented copings that incorporated threads for vertical locking screws. Frameworks were fabricated with a gold alloy that was veneered with acrylic resin or ceramic materials. All frameworks were screw-retained to implants and copings. Frameworks in the group with implant-supported prostheses were fabricated with milled titanium or gold alloy to which denture teeth and resin base material were applied. All prostheses had a minimum of 8 units, at least 4 of which were in one quadrant. Subjects in both groups were mailed a questionnaire consisting of 15 questions focused on various factors related to treatment outcome, such as oral function and patient satisfaction. The response rate was 86%. Both groups reported a high satisfaction rate for most items with few regretting their choice of treatment. Most individuals in both groups reported great improvement in chewing ability and few reported phonetic disturbances. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups. The results of the present study showed similarity in questionnaire responses between the 2 groups of participants. High satisfaction was reported both among subjects who received a complete arch fixed prosthesis in the maxilla supported by dental implants only, as well as among those whose prostheses were supported by a combination of natural teeth and dental implants.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- A long‐term follow‐up study of non‐submerged ITI implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jawsClinical Oral Implants Research, 2002
- Critical evaluation of patient responses to dental implant therapyThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1997
- Patient's opinion and treatment outcome of fixed rehabilitation on Brinemark implants. A 3‐year follow‐up study in private dental practices.Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1997
- A prospective 15‐year follow‐up study of mandibular fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants. Clinical results and marginal bone loss.Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1996
- Tooth Retention and Tooth Loss in the Permanent Dentition of Adults: United States, 1988–1991Journal of Dental Research, 1996
- Fixed implant‐supported prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. A five‐year follow‐up report.Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1994
- Problems with prostheses on implants: A retrospective studyThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1994
- Dental implants: A survey of patients' attitudesThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1989
- Edentulousness—an oral handicap. Patient reactions to treatment with iawbone‐anchored prosthesesJournal of Oral Rehabilitation, 1987
- A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jawInternational Journal of Oral Surgery, 1981