Two implant retained overdentures--a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements.
Identifieur interne : 002F03 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 002F02; suivant : 002F04Two implant retained overdentures--a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements.
Auteurs : J M Thomason [Royaume-Uni] ; S A M. Kelly ; A. Bendkowski ; J S EllisSource :
- Journal of dentistry [ 1879-176X ] ; 2012.
Descripteurs français
- KwdFr :
- MESH :
- Wicri :
- geographic : Canada.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants.
- geographic : Canada.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous.
- Costs and Cost Analysis, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Denture, Overlay, Humans, Mandible, Mastication, Nutritional Physiological Phenomena, Patient Satisfaction, Qualitative Research, Quality of Life.
Abstract
The McGill consensus statement on overdentures (14) was published following a symposium held at McGill University in Montreal, Canada in 2002. A panel of relevant experts in the field stated that: The evidence currently available suggests that the restoration of the edentulous mandible with a conventional denture is no longer the most appropriate first choice prosthodontic treatment. There is now overwhelming evidence that a two-implant overdenture should become the first choice of treatment for the edentulous mandible (14). In 2009, a further consensus statement was released as a support and follow-up to the McGill consensus statement. This report was jointly created by members of the BSSPD (British Society for the Study of Prosthetic Dentistry) Council and the panel of presenters at the BSSPD conference in York, UK in April 2009 (15). This report also highlighted that since the McGill statement in 2002, uptake by dentists of implant technology for complete denture wearers has been slow. The York statement concluded that 'a substantial body of evidence is now available demonstrating that patients' satisfaction and quality of life with ISOD mandibular overdentures is significantly greater than for conventional dentures. Much of this data comes from randomised controlled trials (15). Whilst it is accepted that the two-implant overdenture is not the gold standard of implant therapy it is the minimum standard that should be sufficient for most people, taking into account performance, patient satisfaction, cost and clinical time.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.08.017
PubMed: 21911034
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream PubMed, to step Corpus: 001326
- to stream PubMed, to step Curation: 001326
- to stream PubMed, to step Checkpoint: 001326
- to stream Ncbi, to step Merge: 003877
- to stream Ncbi, to step Curation: 003877
- to stream Ncbi, to step Checkpoint: 003877
- to stream Main, to step Merge: 002F18
- to stream Main, to step Curation: 002F03
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Two implant retained overdentures--a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements.</title><author><name sortKey="Thomason, J M" sort="Thomason, J M" uniqKey="Thomason J" first="J M" last="Thomason">J M Thomason</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW, England, UK.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW, England</wicri:regionArea><wicri:noRegion>England</wicri:noRegion></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kelly, S A M" sort="Kelly, S A M" uniqKey="Kelly S" first="S A M" last="Kelly">S A M. Kelly</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bendkowski, A" sort="Bendkowski, A" uniqKey="Bendkowski A" first="A" last="Bendkowski">A. Bendkowski</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ellis, J S" sort="Ellis, J S" uniqKey="Ellis J" first="J S" last="Ellis">J S Ellis</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2012">2012</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:21911034</idno><idno type="pmid">21911034</idno><idno type="doi">10.1016/j.jdent.2011.08.017</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">001326</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">001326</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Curation">001326</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Curation">001326</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Checkpoint">001326</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Checkpoint" wicri:step="PubMed">001326</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Ncbi/Merge">003877</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Ncbi/Curation">003877</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Ncbi/Checkpoint">003877</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">002F18</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">002F03</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">002F03</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Two implant retained overdentures--a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements.</title><author><name sortKey="Thomason, J M" sort="Thomason, J M" uniqKey="Thomason J" first="J M" last="Thomason">J M Thomason</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><nlm:affiliation>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW, England, UK.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW, England</wicri:regionArea><wicri:noRegion>England</wicri:noRegion></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kelly, S A M" sort="Kelly, S A M" uniqKey="Kelly S" first="S A M" last="Kelly">S A M. Kelly</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bendkowski, A" sort="Bendkowski, A" uniqKey="Bendkowski A" first="A" last="Bendkowski">A. Bendkowski</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ellis, J S" sort="Ellis, J S" uniqKey="Ellis J" first="J S" last="Ellis">J S Ellis</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Journal of dentistry</title><idno type="eISSN">1879-176X</idno><imprint><date when="2012" type="published">2012</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Canada</term><term>Costs and Cost Analysis</term><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Denture, Overlay</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation)</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Mastication</term><term>Nutritional Physiological Phenomena</term><term>Patient Satisfaction</term><term>Qualitative Research</term><term>Quality of Life</term></keywords><keywords scheme="KwdFr" xml:lang="fr"><term>Canada</term><term>Coûts et analyse des coûts</term><term>Humains</term><term>Implants dentaires</term><term>Mandibule</term><term>Mastication</term><term>Mâchoire édentée (rééducation et réadaptation)</term><term>Overdenture</term><term>Phénomènes physiologiques nutritionnels</term><term>Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée</term><term>Qualité de vie</term><term>Recherche qualitative</term><term>Satisfaction du patient</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="geographic" xml:lang="en"><term>Canada</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rehabilitation" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rééducation et réadaptation" xml:lang="fr"><term>Mâchoire édentée</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Costs and Cost Analysis</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Denture, Overlay</term><term>Humans</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Mastication</term><term>Nutritional Physiological Phenomena</term><term>Patient Satisfaction</term><term>Qualitative Research</term><term>Quality of Life</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="fr"><term>Canada</term><term>Coûts et analyse des coûts</term><term>Humains</term><term>Implants dentaires</term><term>Mandibule</term><term>Mastication</term><term>Overdenture</term><term>Phénomènes physiologiques nutritionnels</term><term>Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée</term><term>Qualité de vie</term><term>Recherche qualitative</term><term>Satisfaction du patient</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Wicri" type="geographic" xml:lang="fr"><term>Canada</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The McGill consensus statement on overdentures (14) was published following a symposium held at McGill University in Montreal, Canada in 2002. A panel of relevant experts in the field stated that: The evidence currently available suggests that the restoration of the edentulous mandible with a conventional denture is no longer the most appropriate first choice prosthodontic treatment. There is now overwhelming evidence that a two-implant overdenture should become the first choice of treatment for the edentulous mandible (14). In 2009, a further consensus statement was released as a support and follow-up to the McGill consensus statement. This report was jointly created by members of the BSSPD (British Society for the Study of Prosthetic Dentistry) Council and the panel of presenters at the BSSPD conference in York, UK in April 2009 (15). This report also highlighted that since the McGill statement in 2002, uptake by dentists of implant technology for complete denture wearers has been slow. The York statement concluded that 'a substantial body of evidence is now available demonstrating that patients' satisfaction and quality of life with ISOD mandibular overdentures is significantly greater than for conventional dentures. Much of this data comes from randomised controlled trials (15). Whilst it is accepted that the two-implant overdenture is not the gold standard of implant therapy it is the minimum standard that should be sufficient for most people, taking into account performance, patient satisfaction, cost and clinical time.</div></front></TEI><affiliations><list><country><li>Royaume-Uni</li></country></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Bendkowski, A" sort="Bendkowski, A" uniqKey="Bendkowski A" first="A" last="Bendkowski">A. Bendkowski</name><name sortKey="Ellis, J S" sort="Ellis, J S" uniqKey="Ellis J" first="J S" last="Ellis">J S Ellis</name><name sortKey="Kelly, S A M" sort="Kelly, S A M" uniqKey="Kelly S" first="S A M" last="Kelly">S A M. Kelly</name></noCountry><country name="Royaume-Uni"><noRegion><name sortKey="Thomason, J M" sort="Thomason, J M" uniqKey="Thomason J" first="J M" last="Thomason">J M Thomason</name></noRegion></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Main/Exploration
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002F03 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 002F03 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Main
|étape= Exploration
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:21911034
|texte= Two implant retained overdentures--a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:21911034" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |