Varshney Nitish, Aggarwal Sumit, Kumar Shalabh, Singh S P
Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, ITS - CDSR, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2019 Jan-Mar;19(1):49-57. doi: 10.4103/jips.jips_281_18.
The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the retention and patient satisfaction in implant supported mandibular overdenture with three different attachment system.
After evaluation of prosthetic space, fifteen edentulous subjects received two implants in the inter-foramina region of the mandible and were divided into 3 groups with 5 subjects each, delayed loading protocol was followed in all the patients. The retention force and satisfaction level with the attachments at baseline and after 6 months was measured in a standardised way using retentive device and VAS questionnaire. The study was based on evaluation of retention and patient satisfaction. 15 subjects were included in the study. The results obtained were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA test, and multiple comparisons were carried out using the Bonferroni tests.
At the end of six months, the retention force and satisfaction level was higher in Group 3 (Kerator attachment) as compared to Group 1 (ball and socket attachment) and Group 2 (bar and clip attachment) and patient satisfaction was equal in groups 1, 2 and 3 but the total number of interventions is significantly higher in the attachment bar. Analysis of variance with repeated measures showed significant differences in retention force among the three attachment types.
(1) Group 3 (kerator attachment) exhibit higher retentive capacities than Group 1 (ball and socket attachment) and Group 2 (bar and clip attachment). (2) patient satisfaction was higher in Group 3 (Kerator attachment) in compare to Group 1 (ball and socket attachment) and Group 2 (bar and clip attachment).
本研究旨在评估和比较三种不同附着系统的种植体支持下颌覆盖义齿的固位力和患者满意度。
在评估修复空间后，15名无牙颌受试者在下颌孔间区域植入两颗种植体，并分为3组，每组5名受试者，所有患者均采用延期加载方案。使用固位装置和视觉模拟量表（VAS）问卷以标准化方式测量基线时和6个月后的附着体固位力和满意度水平。本研究基于固位力和患者满意度的评估。15名受试者纳入研究。使用单因素方差分析对所得结果进行统计学分析，并使用Bonferroni检验进行多重比较。
六个月结束时，第3组（Kerator附着体）的固位力和满意度水平高于第1组（球窝附着体）和第2组（杆卡附着体），第1、2和3组患者满意度相同，但杆附着体的干预总数明显更高。重复测量方差分析显示三种附着体类型之间的固位力存在显著差异。
（1）第3组（Kerator附着体）比第1组（球窝附着体）和第2组（杆卡附着体）表现出更高的固位能力。（2）与第1组（球窝附着体）和第2组（杆卡附着体）相比，第3组（Kerator附着体）患者满意度更高。
