Dental and Medical Problems

Dent. Med. Probl.
Index Copernicus (ICV 2018) – 113.05
MNiSW – 20
Average rejection rate – 70.86%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download original text (EN)

Dental and Medical Problems

2019, vol. 56, nr 4, October-December, p. 411–418

doi: 10.17219/dmp/109945

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

Patient-reported outcomes and efficiency of complete dentures made with simplified methods: A meta-analysis

Efektywność protez całkowitych wykonanych metodami uproszczonymi w opinii pacjentów – metaanaliza

Asim Al-Ansari1,A,B,D,E,F, Maha El Tantawi1,B,C,D,E,F

1 Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Abstract

Background. An increasing lifetime expectancy of the elderly highlights the importance of prosthodontic techniques, such as preparing complete dentures, which can restore the complete loss of teeth.
Objectives. The present study compared patient-reported outcomes and efficiency in terms of preparation time and cost of a simplified complete denture (SCD) and a conventional complete denture (CCD) in edentulous patients using a meta-analysis of clinical trials (CTs).
Material and Methods. A literature search was conducted for studies comparing SCD and CCD in MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus and World of Science, and through analyzing the reference lists of the retrieved studies, without language or time limits. Studies fitting the pre-specified inclusion criteria were assessed for quality and the extracted data referred to the following issues: patient satisfaction measured using a 100-millimeter visual analog scale (VAS); impact on quality of life estimated using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)-19 on a scale from 0 to 38; the proportion of cost of SCD to CCD; and time in minutes to deliver dentures. The results were pooled in meta-analyses and displayed in forest plots.
Results. Eleven publications referring to 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There were no differences between SCD and CCD in patient satisfaction (mean difference: 0.896, 95% CI (confidence interval): −2.947, 4.739) or their impact on quality of life (mean difference: 0.379, 95% CI: −0.994, 1.751). It required significantly less time to deliver SCD (mean difference: −274.16, 95% CI: −348.37, −199.96) and it cost significantly less (proportion: 0.740, 95% CI: 0.597, 0.882). Both SCD and CCD similarly impacted the patient’s quality of life and satisfaction. It took about 4.5 h less to deliver SCD to patients as compared to CCD and the cost of SCD was 75% of the cost of CCD.
Conclusion. Compared to CCD, SCD had a similar impact in terms of satisfaction and quality of life with reduced treatment time and cost. More studies are needed in low-resource settings, where SCD may have a greater advantage.

Key words

complete dentures, Health-Related Quality of Life, patient comfort, dental services

Słowa kluczowe

protezy całkowite, jakość życia uwarunkowana stanem zdrowia, komfort pacjenta, usługi dentystyczne

References (22)

  1. Müller F. Interventions for edentate elders – what is the evidence? Gerodontology. 2014;31(Suppl 1):44–51.
  2. Carlsson GE, Omar R. The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37(2):143–156.
  3. Ye Y, Sun J. Simplified complete denture: A systematic review of the literature. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(4):267–274.
  4. Kawai Y, Murakami H, Takanashi Y, Lund JP, Feine JS. Efficient resource use in simplified complete denture fabrication. J Prosthodont. 2010;19(7):512–516.
  5. Jo A, Kanazawa M, Sato Y, Iwaki M, Akiba N, Minakuchi S. A randomized controlled trial of the different impression methods for the complete denture fabrication: Patient-reported outcomes. J Dent. 2015;43(8):989–996.
  6. Ceruti P, Mobilio N, Bellia E, Borracchini A, Catapano S, Gassino G. Simplified edentulous treatment: A multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the timing and clinical outcomes of the technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(4):462–467.
  7. Lira-Oetiker M, Seguel-Galdames F, Quero-Vallejos I, Uribe SE. Randomised clinical trial of patient satisfaction with traditional and simplified complete dentures. J Oral Rehabil. 2018;45(5):386–392.
  8. Paulino MR, Alves LR, Gurgel BC, Calderon PS. Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;113(1):12–16.
  9. Miyayasu A, Kanazawa M, Jo A, Sato Y, Minakuchi S. Cost-effectiveness analysis of two impression methods for the fabrication of mandibular complete dentures. J Dent. 2018;68:98–103.
  10. Kawai Y, Murakami H, Feine JS. Do traditional techniques produce better conventional complete dentures than simplified techniques? A 10-year follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. J Dent. 2018;74:30–36.
  11. Egger E, Smith GD, Altman DG, eds.. Systematic Reviews in Health Care. 2nd ed. London, UK: BMJ Publishing Group; 2001:100–102.
  12. Elia M, Normand C, Laviano A, Norman K. A systematic review of the cost and cost effectiveness of using standard oral nutritional supplements in community and care home settings. Clin Nutr. 2016;35(1):125–137.
  13. Lansingh VC, Carter MJ, Martens M. Global cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery. Ophthalmology. 2007;114(9):1670–1678.
  14. Zhang S, Palazuelos-Munoz S, Balsells EM, Nair H, Chit A, Kyaw MH. Cost of hospital management of Clostridium difficile infection in United States – a meta-analysis and modelling study. BMC Infect Dis. 2016;16(1):447.
  15. OpenMeta[Analyst]. http://www.cebm.brown.edu/openmeta/. Accessed November 15, 2018.
  16. Suurmond R, van Rhee, H, Hak T. Introduction, comparison, and validation of Meta-Essentials: A free and simple tool for meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2017;8(4):537–553.
  17. Dee A, Kearns K, O’Neill C, et al. The direct and indirect costs of both overweight and obesity: A systematic review. BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:242.
  18. Vecchia MP, Regis RR, Cunha TR, de Andrade IM, da Matta JC, de Souza RF. A randomized trial on simplified and conventional methods for complete denture fabrication: Cost analysis. J Prosthodont. 2014;23(3):182–191.
  19. Regis RR, Cunha TR, Della Vecchia MP, Ribeiro AB, Silva-Lovato CH, de Souza RF. A randomised trial of a simplified method for complete denture fabrication: Patient perception and quality. J Oral Rehabil. 2013;40(7):535–545.
  20. Kawai Y, Murakami H, Shariati B, et al. Do traditional techniques produce better conventional complete dentures than simplified techniques? J Dent. 2005;33(8):659–668.
  21. Nuñez MCO, Silva DC, Barcelos BA, Leles CR. Patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life after treatment with traditional and simplified protocols for complete denture construction. Gerodontology. 2015;32(4):247–253.
  22. Heydecke G, Vogeler M, Wolkewitz M, Türp JC, Strub JR. Simplified versus comprehensive fabrication of complete dentures: Patient ratings of denture satisfaction from a randomized crossover trial. Quintessence Int. 2008;39(2):107–116.