EdenteV2, PascalFrancis, Corpus, bibRecord, 000095

Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements

Identifieur interne : 000095 ( PascalFrancis/Corpus ); précédent : 000094; suivant : 000096

Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements

Auteurs : J. M. Thomason ; S. A. M. Kelly ; A. Bendkowski ; J. S. Ellis

Source :

Journal of dentistry [ 0300-5712 ] ; 2012.

RBID : Pascal:12-0070387

Descripteurs français

Pascal (Inist)
- Edentation, Implant, Article synthèse, Revue bibliographique, Dentier, Recommandation, Homme, Dentisterie, Overdenture.

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Bibliographic review, Dentistry, Denture, Edentulousness, Human, Implant, Recommendation, Review.

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.

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.

A01	`01`	`1`		`@0 0300-5712`
A03		`1`		`@0 J. dent.`
A05				`@2 40`
A06				`@2 1`
A08	`01`	`1`	`ENG`	`@1 Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements`
A11	`01`	`1`		`@1 THOMASON (J. M.)`
A11	`02`	`1`		`@1 KELLY (S. A. M)`
A11	`03`	`1`		`@1 BENDKOWSKI (A.)`
A11	`04`	`1`		`@1 ELLIS (J. S.)`
A14	`01`			`@1 School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University @2 Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW @3 GBR @Z 1 aut. @Z 2 aut. @Z 3 aut. @Z 4 aut.`
A14	`02`			`@1 Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University @2 Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW @3 GBR @Z 1 aut. @Z 2 aut. @Z 3 aut. @Z 4 aut.`
A14	`03`			`@1 Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University @2 Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW @3 GBR @Z 1 aut. @Z 3 aut. @Z 4 aut.`
A20				`@1 22-34`
A21				`@1 2012`
A23	`01`			`@0 ENG`
A43	`01`			`@1 INIST @2 16217 @5 354000508828780030`
A44				`@0 0000 @1 © 2012 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.`
A45				`@0 73 ref.`
A47	`01`	`1`		`@0 12-0070387`
A60				`@1 P`
A61				`@0 A`
A64	`01`	`1`		`@0 Journal of dentistry`
A66	`01`			`@0 GBR`
C01	`01`		`ENG`	@0 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.
C02	`01`	`X`		`@0 002B25C02`
C02	`02`	`X`		`@0 002B10C02`
C03	`01`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Edentation @5 01`
C03	`01`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Edentulousness @5 01`
C03	`01`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Edentación @5 01`
C03	`02`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Implant @5 07`
C03	`02`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Implant @5 07`
C03	`02`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Implante @5 07`
C03	`03`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Article synthèse @5 08`
C03	`03`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Review @5 08`
C03	`03`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Artículo síntesis @5 08`
C03	`04`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Revue bibliographique @5 09`
C03	`04`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Bibliographic review @5 09`
C03	`04`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Revista bibliográfica @5 09`
C03	`05`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Dentier @5 13`
C03	`05`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Denture @5 13`
C03	`05`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Dentadura @5 13`
C03	`06`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Recommandation @5 14`
C03	`06`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Recommendation @5 14`
C03	`06`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Recomendación @5 14`
C03	`07`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Homme @5 15`
C03	`07`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Human @5 15`
C03	`07`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Hombre @5 15`
C03	`08`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Dentisterie @5 30`
C03	`08`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Dentistry @5 30`
C03	`08`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Odontología @5 30`
C03	`09`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Overdenture @4 INC @5 86`
C07	`01`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Pathologie dentaire @5 37`
C07	`01`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Dental disease @5 37`
C07	`01`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Diente patología @5 37`
C07	`02`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Stomatologie @5 38`
C07	`02`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Stomatology @5 38`
C07	`02`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Estomatología @5 38`
N21				`@1 051`

Format Inist (serveur)

NO :	PASCAL 12-0070387 INIST
ET :	Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements
AU :	THOMASON (J. M.); KELLY (S. A. M); BENDKOWSKI (A.); ELLIS (J. S.)
AF :	School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University/Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.); Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University/Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.); Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University/Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.)
DT :	Publication en série; Niveau analytique
SO :	Journal of dentistry; ISSN 0300-5712; Royaume-Uni; Da. 2012; Vol. 40; No. 1; Pp. 22-34; Bibl. 73 ref.
LA :	Anglais
EA :	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.
CC :	002B25C02; 002B10C02
FD :	Edentation; Implant; Article synthèse; Revue bibliographique; Dentier; Recommandation; Homme; Dentisterie; Overdenture
FG :	Pathologie dentaire; Stomatologie
ED :	Edentulousness; Implant; Review; Bibliographic review; Denture; Recommendation; Human; Dentistry
EG :	Dental disease; Stomatology
SD :	Edentación; Implante; Artículo síntesis; Revista bibliográfica; Dentadura; Recomendación; Hombre; Odontología
LO :	INIST-16217.354000508828780030
ID :	12-0070387

Links to Exploration step

Pascal:12-0070387

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">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><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="03"><s1>Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</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>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bendkowski, A" sort="Bendkowski, A" uniqKey="Bendkowski A" first="A." last="Bendkowski">A. Bendkowski</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="03"><s1>Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Ellis, J S" sort="Ellis, J S" uniqKey="Ellis J" first="J. S." last="Ellis">J. S. Ellis</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="03"><s1>Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno>
<idno type="inist">12-0070387</idno>
<date when="2012">2012</date>
<idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 12-0070387 INIST</idno>
<idno type="RBID">Pascal:12-0070387</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000095</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">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><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="03"><s1>Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</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>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bendkowski, A" sort="Bendkowski, A" uniqKey="Bendkowski A" first="A." last="Bendkowski">A. Bendkowski</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="03"><s1>Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Ellis, J S" sort="Ellis, J S" uniqKey="Ellis J" first="J. S." last="Ellis">J. S. Ellis</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="03"><s1>Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of dentistry</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. dent.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0300-5712</idno>
<imprint><date when="2012">2012</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Journal of dentistry</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. dent.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0300-5712</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Bibliographic review</term>
<term>Dentistry</term>
<term>Denture</term>
<term>Edentulousness</term>
<term>Human</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Recommendation</term>
<term>Review</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Edentation</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Article synthèse</term>
<term>Revue bibliographique</term>
<term>Dentier</term>
<term>Recommandation</term>
<term>Homme</term>
<term>Dentisterie</term>
<term>Overdenture</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>
<inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0300-5712</s0>
</fA01>
<fA03 i2="1"><s0>J. dent.</s0>
</fA03>
<fA05><s2>40</s2>
</fA05>
<fA06><s2>1</s2>
</fA06>
<fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements</s1>
</fA08>
<fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>THOMASON (J. M.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>KELLY (S. A. M)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="03" i2="1"><s1>BENDKOWSKI (A.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="04" i2="1"><s1>ELLIS (J. S.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA14 i1="01"><s1>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA14 i1="02"><s1>Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA14 i1="03"><s1>Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University</s1>
<s2>Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA20><s1>22-34</s1>
</fA20>
<fA21><s1>2012</s1>
</fA21>
<fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0>
</fA23>
<fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1>
<s2>16217</s2>
<s5>354000508828780030</s5>
</fA43>
<fA44><s0>0000</s0>
<s1>© 2012 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1>
</fA44>
<fA45><s0>73 ref.</s0>
</fA45>
<fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>12-0070387</s0>
</fA47>
<fA60><s1>P</s1>
</fA60>
<fA61><s0>A</s0>
</fA61>
<fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Journal of dentistry</s0>
</fA64>
<fA66 i1="01"><s0>GBR</s0>
</fA66>
<fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>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.</s0>
</fC01>
<fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>002B25C02</s0>
</fC02>
<fC02 i1="02" i2="X"><s0>002B10C02</s0>
</fC02>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Edentation</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Edentulousness</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Edentación</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Implant</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Implant</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Implante</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Article synthèse</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Review</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Artículo síntesis</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Revue bibliographique</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Bibliographic review</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Revista bibliográfica</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Dentier</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Denture</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Dentadura</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Recommandation</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Recommendation</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Recomendación</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Homme</s0>
<s5>15</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Human</s0>
<s5>15</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Hombre</s0>
<s5>15</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Dentisterie</s0>
<s5>30</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Dentistry</s0>
<s5>30</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Odontología</s0>
<s5>30</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Overdenture</s0>
<s4>INC</s4>
<s5>86</s5>
</fC03>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Pathologie dentaire</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Dental disease</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Diente patología</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Stomatologie</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Stomatology</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Estomatología</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fN21><s1>051</s1>
</fN21>
</pA>
</standard>
<server><NO>PASCAL 12-0070387 INIST</NO>
<ET>Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements</ET>
<AU>THOMASON (J. M.); KELLY (S. A. M); BENDKOWSKI (A.); ELLIS (J. S.)</AU>
<AF>School of Dental Sciences Newcastle University/Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.); Institute for Ageing and Health Newcastle University/Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.); Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University/Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut.)</AF>
<DT>Publication en série; Niveau analytique</DT>
<SO>Journal of dentistry; ISSN 0300-5712; Royaume-Uni; Da. 2012; Vol. 40; No. 1; Pp. 22-34; Bibl. 73 ref.</SO>
<LA>Anglais</LA>
<EA>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.</EA>
<CC>002B25C02; 002B10C02</CC>
<FD>Edentation; Implant; Article synthèse; Revue bibliographique; Dentier; Recommandation; Homme; Dentisterie; Overdenture</FD>
<FG>Pathologie dentaire; Stomatologie</FG>
<ED>Edentulousness; Implant; Review; Bibliographic review; Denture; Recommendation; Human; Dentistry</ED>
<EG>Dental disease; Stomatology</EG>
<SD>Edentación; Implante; Artículo síntesis; Revista bibliográfica; Dentadura; Recomendación; Hombre; Odontología</SD>
<LO>INIST-16217.354000508828780030</LO>
<ID>12-0070387</ID>
</server>
</inist>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000095 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000095 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Santé
   |area=    EdenteV2
   |flux=    PascalFrancis
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     Pascal:12-0070387
   |texte=   Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32.
Data generation: Thu Nov 30 15:26:48 2017. Site generation: Tue Mar 8 16:36:20 2022

	Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté

Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements

Two implant retained overdentures-A review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements

Source :

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Format Inist (serveur)

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri