|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Within-subject Comparisons of Implant-supported Mandibular Prostheses: Psychometric Evaluation
P. de Grandmont
Universite de Montreal, Faculté de medecine dentaire, Departement de dentisterie de restauration, C.P. 6128, Succ. Centreville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3J7, Canada
J.S. Feine
Département de dentisterie de restauration, Faculte de medecine dentaire, Universite de Montreal
R. Taché
Département de dentisterie de restauration, Faculte de medecine dentaire, Universite de Montreal
P. Boudrias
Département de dentisterie de restauration, Faculte de medecine dentaire, Universite de Montreal
W.B. Donohue
Département de stomatologie, Faculte de medecine dentaire, Universite de Montreal, and Division of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, St. Mary's Hospital
R. Tanguay
Département de stomatologie, Faculte de medecine dentaire, Universite de Montreal, and Division of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, St. Mary's Hospital
J.P. Lund
Département de stomatologie, Faculte de medecine dentaire, and Centre de recherche en sciences neurologiques, Faculte de medecine , Universite de Montreal
In a within-subject cross-over clinical trial, psychometric and functional measurements were taken while 15 completely edentulous subjects wore mandibular fixed prostheses and long-bar removable implant-supported prostheses. In this paper, the results of a psychometric assessment are presented. Eight subjects first received the fixed bridge and seven the removable type. After having worn a prosthesis for a minimum of two months, subjects responded to psychometric scales that measured their perceptions of various factors associated with prostheses. They also chewed test foods while masticatory activity was recorded. The prostheses were then changed and the procedures repeated. At the end of the study, patients were asked to choose the prosthesis that they wished to keep. Patients assigned significantly higher scores, on visual analogue scales, to both types of implant-supported prostheses than to their original conventional prostheses for all factors tested, including general satisfaction. However, no statistically significant differences between the two implant-supported prostheses were detected except for the difficulty of chewing carrot, apple, and sausage. For these foods, the fixed prostheses were rated higher. Subjects' responses to category scales were consistent with their responses to the visual analogue scales. These results suggest that, although patients find the fixed bridge to be significantly better for chewing harder foods, there is no difference in their general satisfaction with the two types of prostheses.
Key Words: Oral Implants • Prostheses • Clinical Trial.
REFERENCES
- Agerberg G., Carlsson GE (1981). Chewing ability in relation to dental and general health. Acta Odontol Scand 39:147-153.
- Albrektsson T., Blomberg S., Branemark A., Carlsson GE (1987). Edentulousness-an oral handicap. Patient reactions to treatment with jawbone-anchored prostheses. J Oral Rehabil 14:503-511.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Bergman B., Carlsson GE (1972). Review of 54 complete denture wearers patients' opinions 1 year after treatment. Acta Odontol Scand 30:399-414.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Beumer J, Lewis SG, editors (1989).The Branemark implant system. Clinical and laboratory procedures. St. Louis (MO): Ishiyaku EuroAmerica Inc.
- Blomberg S., Lindquist LW (1983). Psychological reactions to edentulousness and treatment with jawbone-anchored bridges. Acta Psychiatr Scand 68:251-262.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Branemark P-I., Hansson BO, Adell R., Breine U., Lindstrom J., Hallen O., et al. (1977). Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 11 (Suppl 16).
- Chauncey HH, Krishan KK, Feller RP, Wayler AH (1981). Altered masticatory function and perceptual estimates of chewing experience. Geriatric Dentistry 1:250-255.
- Cohen J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.
- Dao TTT, Chmielewski W., Tache R., Feine JS, Lund JP ( 1992). Quantification of patient satisfaction with dental prostheses (abstract). J Dent Res 71:609.
- de Grandmont P., Gauthier G., Tache R. (1992). Les protheses totales adjointes a des implants ostéo-intégrés. J Dent Quebec 29251-255.
- de Grandmont P., Lamarche C., Donohue WB, Boudrias P., Feine JS, Lund JP ( 1991). Evaluation of patient satisfaction in prosthodontics (abstract). J Dent Res 70:559.
- de Grandmont P., Feine JS, Tache R., Donohue WB, Lund JP ( 1992). Within-subject comparison of implant-supported prostheses: Visual analogue data (abstract). J Dent Res 71:716.
- Emmell S., Maskawi K., Feine JS, Lund JP ( 1990). Validation of methods for the analysis of masticatory function (abstract). J Dent Res 69:334.
- Emmell S., Maskawi K., Tanguay R., Feine JS, Lund JP ( 1991). The influence of food type on experimental design in studies of chewing efficiency (abstract). J Dent Res 70:277.
- Feine JS, de Grandmont P., Donohue WB, Brien N., Tache R., Lund JP ( 1991). Sample size determination in a within-subject comparison of implant-supported prostheses (abstract). J Dent Res 70:560.
- Feine JS, de Grandmont P., Lamarche C., Boudrias P., Lund JP ( 1992). Within-subject comparison of implant-supported prostheses: Categorical data (abstract). J Dent Res 71:716.
- Feine JS, de Grandmont P., Boudrias P., Tache R., Lamarche C., Brien N., et al. (1994). Within-subject comparisons of implant-supported mandibular prostheses: Choice of prosthesis. J Dent Res 73:1105-1111.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Goldstein H. (1986). Multilevel mixed linear model analysis using iterative generalized least squares. Biometrika 73:43-56.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Goldstein H. (1987). Multilevel model in educational and social research. London: Griffins.
- Haraldson T., Carlsson GE (1979). Chewing efficiency in patients with osseointegrated oral implant bridges. Swed Dent J 3:183-191.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Haraldson T., Jemt T., Stalblad PA, Lekholm U. (1988). Oral function in subjects wth overdentures supported by osseointegrated implants. Scand J Dent Res 96:235-242.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Hobo S., Ichida E., Garcia LT (1989). Osseointegration and occlusal rehabilitation. Tokyo: Quintessence.
- Hoogstraten J., Lamers LM (1987). Patient satisfaction after insertion of an osseointegrated implant bridge. J Oral Rehabil 14:481-487.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Jaeschke R., Guyatt GH (1990). How to develop and validate a new quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life assessments in clinical trials. New York: Raven Press Ltd., 47-61.
- Jemt T. ( 1991). Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Brånemark implants in edentulous jaws: A study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual check-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 6:270-276.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Jemt T., Stalblad PA (1986). The effect of chewing movements on changing mandibular complete dentures to osseointegrated overdentures. J Prosthet Dent 55:357-361.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Jemt T., Lindqvist L., Hedegard B. (1985). Changes in chewing patterns of patients with complete dentures after placement of osseointegrated implants in the mandible. J Prosthet Dent 53:578-583.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Lindquist LW, Carlsson GE (1985). Long-term effects on chewing with mandibular fixed prostheses on osseointegrated implants. Acta Odontol Scand 43:39-45.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Lundqvist S., Carlsson G. (1983). Maxillary fixed prostheses on osseointegrated dental implants. J Prosthet Dent 50:262-270.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Lundqvist S., Lohmander-Ageskov A., Haraldsson T. (1992). Speech before and after treatment with bridges on osseointegrated implants in the edentulous upper jaw. Clin Oral Implant Res 3:57-62.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Naert I., Quirynen M., Theuniers G., van Steenberghe D. (1991). Prosthetic aspects of osseointegrated fixtures supporting overdentures. A 4-year report. J Prosthet Dent 65:671-679.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Nunnally JC (1978). Psychometric theory. 2nd rev. ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
- Spilker B. (1991). Guide to clinical trials. New York: Raven Press, Ltd.
- Streiner DL, Norman GR (1989). Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. New York: Oxford Medical Publications.
- Strenio J., Weisberg HI, Bryk AS ( 1983). Empirical Bayes estimation of individual growth curve parameters and their relationship to covariates. Biometrics 39:71-86.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Tache R., Lamarche C., Brien N., Boudrias P., de Grandmont P., Feine J., et al. (1991). The assessment of treatment success by prosthodontists and their patients (abstract). J Dent Res 70:559.
- Tanguay R., Bushang PH, Goldstein H. (1993). Multilevel models for repeated measures-a flexible approach for studying dental arch morphology. Am J Hum Biol 5:85-91.
- Tavares M., Branch LG, Shulman L. (1990). Dental implant patients and their satisfaction with treatment. J Dent Ed 54:670-679.
- van Waas MAJ (1990). The influence of psychologic factors on patient satisfaction with complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 90:545-548.
- Vervoorn JM, Duinkerke ASH, Luteijn F., van de Poel ACM (1988). Assessment of denture satisfaction. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 16:364-367.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Vig PS (1991). Clinical evidence in orthodontics: New clothes for the emperor? In: Vig KD, Vig PS, editors. Clinical research as the basis of clinical practice. Craniofacial Growth Series 25. Ann Arbor (MI): The University of Michigan, Center for Human Growth and Development, 203-222.
- Zarb GA, Jansson T. (1985). Prosthodontic procedures. In: Branemark A, Zarb A, Albrektsson T, editors. Tissue-integrated prostheses. Chicago: Quintessence, 241-282.
- Zarb GA, Schmitt A., Baker G. (1987). Tissue-integrated prostheses: osseointegration research in Toronto. Int J Periodont Rest Dent 7:9-36.
Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 73, No. 5,
1096-1104 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/00220345940730051201
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
L. Tang, J.P. Lund, R. Tache, C.M.L. Clokie, and J.S. Feine
A Within-subject Comparison of Mandibular Long-bar and Hybrid Implant-supported Prostheses: Evaluation of Masticatory Function
Journal of Dental Research,
September 1, 1999;
78(9):
1544 - 1553.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Henry
Clinical Experiences with Dental Implants
Advances in Dental Research,
June 1, 1999;
13(1):
147 - 152.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Tang, J.P. Lund, R. Tache, C.M.L. Clokie, and J.S. Feine
A Within-subject Comparison of Mandibular Long-bar and Hybrid Implant-supported Prostheses: Psychometric Evaluation and Patient Preference
Journal of Dental Research,
October 1, 1997;
76(10):
1675 - 1683.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M.A. Peyron, K. Maskawi, A. Woda, R. Tanguay, and J.P. Lund
Effects of Food Texture and Sample Thickness on Mandibular Movement and Hardness Assessment during Biting in Man
Journal of Dental Research,
March 1, 1997;
76(3):
789 - 795.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.S. Feine, K. Maskawi, P. De Grandmont, W. Donohue, R. Tanguay, and J.P. Lund
Within-subject Comparisons of Implant-supported Mandibular Prostheses: Evaluation of Masticatory Function
Journal of Dental Research,
October 1, 1994;
73(10):
1646 - 1656.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.S. Feine, P. de Grandmont, P. Boudrias, N. Brien, C. LaMarche, R. Tache, and J.P. Lund
Within-subject Comparisons of Implant-supported Mandibular Prostheses: Choice of Prosthesis
Journal of Dental Research,
May 1, 1994;
73(5):
1105 - 1111.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
