Differences in self-perceived OHRQoL between fully dentate subjects and edentulous patients depending on their prosthesis type, socio-demographic profile, and clinical features.

OBJECTIVES

This observational cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate and compare the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and clinical performance between dentate subjects and edentulous patients restored with conventional dentures or implant overdentures.

METHODS

85 edentulous patients were grouped as follows: Group-1 (CD): conventional denture wearers (n = 42), and Group-2 (IO): implant-retained overdenture wearers (n = 43). For the OHRQoL comparisons, a control group of subjects with a healthy natural dentition (Group-3, ND; n = 50) was included. Participants completed three validated questionnaires (OHIP-14sp, OHIP-20sp, and QoLIP-10). Socio-demographic data, prosthesis-related factors, clinical condition of the mouth, and patient subjective evaluations, were gathered. Descriptive and non-parametric probes were run (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The ND group was the most unsatisfied (OHIP-14sp; p ≤ 0.001). The OHIP-20sp attributed significantly worse Psychological disability (p = 0.029) and Handicap (p = 0.027) to CD wearers when compared to IO wearers. The CD group showed the significantly highest need for relining (p = 0.041), and the lowest retention (p = 0.011). The OHIP-14sp disclosed a significantly worse OHRQoL for those volunteers who had a job (p = 0.003), a basic education instead of a secondary one (p = 0.022), and no partner (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall OHRQoL was comparable for both prosthodontic groups, being modulated by socio-demographic and prosthesis-related features. Nonetheless, CD wearers presented prosthetic complications more frequently.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

While dentate subjects were the most critical about their oral condition and its repercussion in their life, implant overdenture wearers tended to observe a better OHRQoL and clinical performance compared to conventional denture wearers.