Objectives: Implant-supported overdentures are an established dental treatment mode. The aim of this prospective study was and interindividual comparison of patient satisfaction with restorations retained by a prefabricated and thus inexpensive attachment system (Locator®) or with a technologically complex and thus expensive attachment system (ceramic/electroplated double crowns) with similar retentive performance.

Materials And Methods: Twelve patients received a Locator and a double-crown prosthesis in a crossover study for test periods of 3 months each. The main target parameter was the patient's final decision in favor of one of the two prosthesis types.

Results: After completing both test phases, seven patients opted for the Locator prosthesis and five patients opted for the double-crown prosthesis.

Conclusion: Given the predominant lack of statistically significant differences, the two types of prostheses can be described as equivalent. A recommendation in favor of the Locator prosthesis can be motivated by its lower cost.

Clinical Relevance: The results of the study show that the more cost-effective variant was comparable to the more expensive double-crown prosthesis under the conditions prevailing in the study. Depending on the indication, this may influence the decision-making process in daily clinical practice and support the clinician's patient information and consultation efforts.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2491-1DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

prospective study
8
attachment system
8
double-crown prosthesis
8
patients opted
8
locator prosthesis
8
study
5
prosthesis
5
locator® versus
4
versus ceramic/electroplated
4
double-crown
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!