COMPARISON OF ORAL HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE AND MASTICATORY EFFICIENCY IN PATIENTS WEARING IMPLANT-SUPPORTED OVERDENTURES VERSUS CONVENTIONAL COMPLETE DENTURES: A MULTICENTER CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY
Main Article Content
Keywords
Mandibular overdenture; Complete denture; OHRQoL; Masticatory efficiency; OHIP-EDENT; Edentulism; Implant rehabilitation
Abstract
Objective: To compare oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and masticatory efficiency between patients wearing mandibular implant-supported overdentures (IOD) and conventional complete dentures (CD) in clinical settings of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Methods: This analytical cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted from January 2024 to September 2024 across teaching dental institutions and private clinical setups in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. A total of 498 edentulous patients were included and divided into two groups: implant-supported overdenture (IOD) group (n=166) and conventional complete denture (CD) group (n=332). Oral health-related quality of life was assessed using the 19-item OHIP-EDENT questionnaire. At the same time, masticatory efficiency was evaluated using the two-colour chewing gum mixing test based on the Visual Propach Assessment Scale (V-PAS). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 26.0.
Results: Patients in the IOD group demonstrated significantly better outcomes compared to the CD group. The mean OHIP-EDENT score was lower in the IOD group (22.1) compared to the CD group (45.6), indicating improved quality of life (p < 0.001). Similarly, masticatory performance was significantly higher among IOD users (76.4%) compared to CD users (41.2%) (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Mandibular implant-supported overdentures provide significantly superior outcomes in both oral health-related quality of life and masticatory efficiency compared to conventional complete dentures. These findings support the clinical advantage of implant-based rehabilitation in improving functional and psychosocial well-being among edentulous patients in the local population.
References
The McGill consensus statement on overdentures.Int J Prosthodont. 2002;15(4):413–414. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.15.4.413
2. Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C, Moynihan P, Müller F, Naert I, et al.
Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care.
Br Dent J. 2009;207(4):185–186. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.728
3. Emami E, Heydecke G, Rompré PH, de Grandmont P, Feine JS.
Impact of implant support for mandibular dentures on satisfaction, oral and general health-related quality of life.J Dent Res. 2009;88(4):331–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034509333214
4. Allen PF, Locker D.A modified short version of the oral health impact profile for assessing health-related quality of life in edentulous adults.Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2002;30(6):438–444. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00053.x
5. Schimmel M, Christou P, Herrmann F, Müller F.A two-colour chewing gum test for masticatory efficiency.J Oral Rehabil. 2007;34(10):712–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01755.x
6. Fontijn-Tekamp FA, Slagter AP, Van Der Bilt A, Van ‘t Hof MA, Witter DJ, Kalk W, et al.Bite forces with mandibular implant-retained overdentures.J Dent Res. 1998;77(10):1832–1839. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345980770100601
7. Awad MA, Lund JP, Shapiro SH, Locker D, Klemetti E, Chehade A, et al.
Oral health status and treatment satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures.J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90(4):390–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00443-9
8. Carlsson GE.Clinical morbidity and sequelae of treatment with complete dentures.
J Prosthet Dent. 1998;79(1):17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70202-6
9. Müller F, Naharro M, Carlsson GE.What are the prevalence and incidence of tooth loss in the adult and elderly population?Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18(Suppl 3):2–14 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01459.x
10. Heydecke G, Boudrias P, Awad MA, De Albuquerque RF Jr, Lund JP, Feine JS.
Within-subject comparisons of maxillary fixed and removable implant prostheses.
J Dent Res. 2003;82(7):537–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910308200711
11. Feine JS, Awad MA, Lund JP.The impact of implant prostheses on quality of life in edentulous patients.Periodontol 2000. 2003;33:152–162. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0906-6713.2003.03311.x
12. Assunção WG, Zardo GG, Delben JA, Barão VA, Goiato MC.
Comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures and conventional dentures.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18(6):755–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01426.x
13. Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RH, Visser A, Vissink A.
Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(7):722–728. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01710.x
14. Slagter AP, Olthoff LW, Steen WH, Bosman F.Comminution of food by complete denture wearers.J Dent Res. 1992;71(2):380–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345920710020901
15. Van der Bilt A.Assessment of mastication with implications for oral rehabilitation.
J Oral Rehabil. 2011;38(10):754–780. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02197.x
16. Fueki K, Kimoto K, Ogawa T, Garrett NR.Effect of implant-supported or retained dentures on masticatory performance.J Prosthet Dent. 2007;98(6):470–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60148-5
17. John MT, Slade GD, Szentpétery A, Setz JM.Oral health impact profile: dimensional structure and validity.Eur J Oral Sci. 2004;112(4):311–318. https://doi.org/10.1 111/j.1600-0722.2004.00137.x
18. Locker D.Measuring oral health: a conceptual framework.Community Dent Health. 1988;5(1):3–18. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.1988.00003.x
19. Kawai Y, Garrett NR, Roumanas ED.Masticatory performance and food selection in complete denture wearers.J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93(6):571–577. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.prosden t.2005.03.003
20. Brennan DS, Spencer AJ.Oral health-related quality of life among older adults.
Gerodontology. 2004;21(2):113–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2004.00017.x

