Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2024 Oct 16;39(5):776-782. doi: 10.11607/jomi.10734.
To evaluate and compare patient satisfaction levels in edentulous patients treated with different configurations of implant-supported prostheses as well as previous prosthesis experiences before implant treatment.
A study population of 142 patients was identified and separated into four treatment groups: group 1 comprised 43 patients treated with an implant-supported overdenture in the mandible and conventional complete denture in the maxilla; group 2 comprised 32 patients treated with implant-supported overdentures in the maxilla and mandible; group 3 comprised 26 patients treated with an implant-supported overdenture in the mandible and a fixed prosthesis in the maxilla; and group 4 comprised 41 patients treated with implant-supported maxillomandibular fixed restorations. Questionnaires asking about masticatory performance, pronunciation, comfort, and social ability were used to evaluate treatment outcomes.
The patients in group 4 were significantly more satisfied regarding masticatory performance than other treatment modalities. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for comfort and social ability were similar in groups 3 and 4 and significantly higher than those in groups 1 and 2. The patients who used a conventional removable prosthesis before implant treatment were more satisfied with their implant-supported prosthesis regarding social ability (P = .03).
The treatment design of an implant-supported fixed prosthesis in the maxilla and implant overdenture in the mandible provided a comparable level of satisfaction with maxillomandibular fixed prosthesis for edentulous patients. This combination served as a practical solution especially for patients with mandibular atrophy who would require extensive surgeries to support maxillomandibular fixed prostheses. In the maxilla, patient satisfaction with an implantsupported overdenture was not superior to that with a conventional prosthesis. Note that previous removable prosthesis experience may influence social comfort for patients.
评估和比较不同种植体支持式修复体配置以及种植治疗前的先前修复体经历对无牙患者的满意度水平。
确定了一个 142 名患者的研究人群，并将其分为四个治疗组：第 1 组包括 43 名患者，他们在下颌接受种植体支持的覆盖义齿，在上颌接受传统全口义齿治疗；第 2 组包括 32 名患者，他们在上颌和下颌接受种植体支持的覆盖义齿治疗；第 3 组包括 26 名患者，他们在下颌接受种植体支持的覆盖义齿治疗，在上颌接受固定修复体治疗；第 4 组包括 41 名患者，他们接受了种植体支持的上下颌固定修复体治疗。使用评估治疗效果的咀嚼性能、发音、舒适度和社交能力问卷。
第 4 组患者在咀嚼性能方面的满意度明显高于其他治疗方式。舒适度和社交能力的视觉模拟评分（VAS）在第 3 组和第 4 组之间相似，并且明显高于第 1 组和第 2 组。在种植治疗前使用传统可摘义齿的患者在社交能力方面对种植体支持的义齿更满意（P=0.03）。
在上颌采用种植体支持的固定修复体和在下颌采用种植体支持的覆盖义齿的治疗设计为无牙患者提供了与上下颌固定修复体相当的满意度。这种组合为下颌萎缩需要广泛手术以支持上下颌固定修复体的患者提供了一种实用的解决方案。在上颌，种植体支持的覆盖义齿的患者满意度并不优于传统义齿。需要注意的是，先前的可摘义齿经验可能会影响患者的社交舒适度。
