PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare two methods for final impression during the fabrication of complete dentures: a traditional method using custom trays (T-group) and a simplified method using the trial denture baseplate (S-group).

METHODS

A pragmatic clinical trial was conducted among edentulous individuals referred for conventional denture treatment. A consecutive sample of edentulous patients was assigned to two groups by cluster randomisation according to the final impression strategy, 30 in the T-group and 38 in the S-group. In the T-group, an auto-polymerising acrylic resin custom tray was used for impression; in the S-group, the final impression was performed using the try-in dentures. For both groups, zinc oxide eugenol paste was used as the impression material. The quality of the dentures was assessed using two rating scales (Functional Assessment of the Dentures and Kapur method). Moreover, clinical time for denture fabrication, number of post-insertion appointments for adjustments, patient satisfaction and post-treatment oral health-related quality of life impacts were also assessed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between groups regarding prosthodontic and patient-reported outcomes. The S-group demanded less clinical time (P = 0.002), with a 23.3% mean reduction in clinical time (P = 0.002) and lower number of appointments until the delivery of the dentures (S-group = 4.18 vs T-group = 5.0; P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the alternative method for final impression is less time-consuming and has similar clinical outcomes when compared to the traditional final impression method. Findings suggest that this alternative may be considered when efficiency is a critical issue in healthcare services.