A Randomised Controlled Trial of complete denture impression materials
Identifieur interne : 003127 ( Pmc/Corpus ); précédent : 003126; suivant : 003128A Randomised Controlled Trial of complete denture impression materials
Auteurs : T. P. Hyde ; H. L. Craddock ; J. C. Gray ; S. H. Pavitt ; C. Hulme ; M. Godfrey ; C. Fernandez ; N. Navarro-Coy ; S. Dillon ; J. Wright ; S. Brown ; G. Dukanovic ; P. A. BruntonSource :
- Journal of Dentistry [ 0300-5712 ] ; 2014.
Abstract
There is continuing demand for non-implant prosthodontic treatment and yet there is a paucity of high quality Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) evidence for best practice. The aim of this research was to provide evidence for best practice in prosthodontic impressions by comparing two impression materials in a double-blind, randomised, crossover, controlled, clinical trial.
Eighty-five patients were recruited, using published eligibility criteria, to the trial at Leeds Dental Institute, UK. Each patient received two sets of dentures; made using either alginate or silicone impressions. Randomisations determined the order of assessment and order of impressions. The primary outcome was patient blinded preference for unadjusted dentures. Secondary outcomes were patient preference for the adjusted dentures, rating of comfort, stability and chewing efficiency, experience of each impression, and an OHIP-EDENT questionnaire.
Seventy-eight (91.8%) patients completed the primary assessment. 53(67.9%) patients preferred dentures made from silicone impressions while 14(17.9%) preferred alginate impressions. 4(5.1%) patients found both dentures equally satisfactory and 7 (9.0%) found both equally unsatisfactory. There was a 50% difference in preference rates (in favour of silicone) (95%CI 32.7–67.3%,
There is significant evidence that dentures made from silicone impressions were preferred by patients.
Given the strength of the clinical findings within this paper, dentists should consider choosing silicone rather than alginate as their material of choice for secondary impressions for complete dentures.
Trial Registration: ISRCTN 01528038.
This article forms part of a project for which the author (TPH) won the Senior Clinical Unilever Hatton Award of the International Assocation for Dental Research, Capetown, South Africa, June 2014.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.005
PubMed: 24995473
PubMed Central: 4119301
Links to Exploration step
PMC:4119301Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">A Randomised Controlled Trial of complete denture impression materials</title><author><name sortKey="Hyde, T P" sort="Hyde, T P" uniqKey="Hyde T" first="T. P." last="Hyde">T. P. Hyde</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0040">Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Craddock, H L" sort="Craddock, H L" uniqKey="Craddock H" first="H. L." last="Craddock">H. L. Craddock</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0005">University of Aberdeen Dental School, Cornhill Road, Aberdeen AB25 2ZR, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Gray, J C" sort="Gray, J C" uniqKey="Gray J" first="J. C." last="Gray">J. C. Gray</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0010">Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Pavitt, S H" sort="Pavitt, S H" uniqKey="Pavitt S" first="S. H." last="Pavitt">S. H. Pavitt</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0015">Applied Health Research, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hulme, C" sort="Hulme, C" uniqKey="Hulme C" first="C." last="Hulme">C. Hulme</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0020">Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Godfrey, M" sort="Godfrey, M" uniqKey="Godfrey M" first="M." last="Godfrey">M. Godfrey</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0025">Health and Social Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Fernandez, C" sort="Fernandez, C" uniqKey="Fernandez C" first="C." last="Fernandez">C. Fernandez</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0010">Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Navarro Coy, N" sort="Navarro Coy, N" uniqKey="Navarro Coy N" first="N." last="Navarro-Coy">N. Navarro-Coy</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0035">Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dillon, S" sort="Dillon, S" uniqKey="Dillon S" first="S." last="Dillon">S. Dillon</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0040">Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Wright, J" sort="Wright, J" uniqKey="Wright J" first="J." last="Wright">J. Wright</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0035">Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Brown, S" sort="Brown, S" uniqKey="Brown S" first="S." last="Brown">S. Brown</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0010">Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dukanovic, G" sort="Dukanovic, G" uniqKey="Dukanovic G" first="G." last="Dukanovic">G. Dukanovic</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0045">Dental Translational Clinical Research Unit (DenTCRU), Leeds Dental institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Brunton, P A" sort="Brunton, P A" uniqKey="Brunton P" first="P. A." last="Brunton">P. A. Brunton</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0040">Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0050">Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand</nlm:aff></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno><idno type="pmid">24995473</idno><idno type="pmc">4119301</idno><idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4119301</idno><idno type="RBID">PMC:4119301</idno><idno type="doi">10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.005</idno><date when="2014">2014</date><idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">003127</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PMC">003127</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">A Randomised Controlled Trial of complete denture impression materials</title><author><name sortKey="Hyde, T P" sort="Hyde, T P" uniqKey="Hyde T" first="T. P." last="Hyde">T. P. Hyde</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0040">Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Craddock, H L" sort="Craddock, H L" uniqKey="Craddock H" first="H. L." last="Craddock">H. L. Craddock</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0005">University of Aberdeen Dental School, Cornhill Road, Aberdeen AB25 2ZR, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Gray, J C" sort="Gray, J C" uniqKey="Gray J" first="J. C." last="Gray">J. C. Gray</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0010">Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Pavitt, S H" sort="Pavitt, S H" uniqKey="Pavitt S" first="S. H." last="Pavitt">S. H. Pavitt</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0015">Applied Health Research, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hulme, C" sort="Hulme, C" uniqKey="Hulme C" first="C." last="Hulme">C. Hulme</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0020">Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Godfrey, M" sort="Godfrey, M" uniqKey="Godfrey M" first="M." last="Godfrey">M. Godfrey</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0025">Health and Social Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Fernandez, C" sort="Fernandez, C" uniqKey="Fernandez C" first="C." last="Fernandez">C. Fernandez</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0010">Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Navarro Coy, N" sort="Navarro Coy, N" uniqKey="Navarro Coy N" first="N." last="Navarro-Coy">N. Navarro-Coy</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0035">Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dillon, S" sort="Dillon, S" uniqKey="Dillon S" first="S." last="Dillon">S. Dillon</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0040">Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Wright, J" sort="Wright, J" uniqKey="Wright J" first="J." last="Wright">J. Wright</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0035">Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Brown, S" sort="Brown, S" uniqKey="Brown S" first="S." last="Brown">S. Brown</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0010">Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Dukanovic, G" sort="Dukanovic, G" uniqKey="Dukanovic G" first="G." last="Dukanovic">G. Dukanovic</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0045">Dental Translational Clinical Research Unit (DenTCRU), Leeds Dental institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Brunton, P A" sort="Brunton, P A" uniqKey="Brunton P" first="P. A." last="Brunton">P. A. Brunton</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0040">Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="aff0050">Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand</nlm:aff></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Journal of Dentistry</title><idno type="ISSN">0300-5712</idno><idno type="eISSN">1879-176X</idno><imprint><date when="2014">2014</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><sec><title>Objectives</title><p>There is continuing demand for non-implant prosthodontic treatment and yet there is a paucity of high quality Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) evidence for best practice. The aim of this research was to provide evidence for best practice in prosthodontic impressions by comparing two impression materials in a double-blind, randomised, crossover, controlled, clinical trial.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>Eighty-five patients were recruited, using published eligibility criteria, to the trial at Leeds Dental Institute, UK. Each patient received two sets of dentures; made using either alginate or silicone impressions. Randomisations determined the order of assessment and order of impressions. The primary outcome was patient blinded preference for unadjusted dentures. Secondary outcomes were patient preference for the adjusted dentures, rating of comfort, stability and chewing efficiency, experience of each impression, and an OHIP-EDENT questionnaire.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>Seventy-eight (91.8%) patients completed the primary assessment. 53(67.9%) patients preferred dentures made from silicone impressions while 14(17.9%) preferred alginate impressions. 4(5.1%) patients found both dentures equally satisfactory and 7 (9.0%) found both equally unsatisfactory. There was a 50% difference in preference rates (in favour of silicone) (95%CI 32.7–67.3%, <italic>p</italic> < 0.0001).</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>There is significant evidence that dentures made from silicone impressions were preferred by patients.</p></sec><sec><title>Clinical significance</title><p>Given the strength of the clinical findings within this paper, dentists should consider choosing silicone rather than alginate as their material of choice for secondary impressions for complete dentures.</p><p>Trial Registration: ISRCTN 01528038.
</p><p>This article forms part of a project for which the author (TPH) won the Senior Clinical Unilever Hatton Award of the International Assocation for Dental Research, Capetown, South Africa, June 2014.</p></sec></div></front><back><div1 type="bibliography"><listBibl><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Muller, F" uniqKey="Muller F">F. Müller</name></author><author><name sortKey="Salem, K" uniqKey="Salem K">K. Salem</name></author><author><name sortKey="Barbezat, C" uniqKey="Barbezat C">C. Barbezat</name></author><author><name sortKey="Herrmann, F R" uniqKey="Herrmann F">F.R. Herrmann</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schimmel, M" uniqKey="Schimmel M">M. Schimmel</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ellis, J S" uniqKey="Ellis J">J.S. Ellis</name></author><author><name sortKey="Levine, A" uniqKey="Levine A">A. Levine</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bedos, C" uniqKey="Bedos C">C. Bedos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mojon, P" uniqKey="Mojon P">P. Mojon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rosberger, Z" uniqKey="Rosberger Z">Z. Rosberger</name></author><author><name sortKey="Feine, J" uniqKey="Feine J">J. Feine</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Walton, J N" uniqKey="Walton J">J.N. Walton</name></author><author><name sortKey="Macentee, M I" uniqKey="Macentee M">M.I. MacEntee</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Walton, J N" uniqKey="Walton J">J.N. Walton</name></author><author><name sortKey="Macentee, M I" uniqKey="Macentee M">M.I. MacEntee</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Feine, J S" uniqKey="Feine J">J.S. Feine</name></author><author><name sortKey="Carlsson, G E" uniqKey="Carlsson G">G.E. Carlsson</name></author><author><name sortKey="Awad, M A" uniqKey="Awad M">M.A. Awad</name></author><author><name sortKey="Chehade, A" uniqKey="Chehade A">A. Chehade</name></author><author><name sortKey="Duncan, W J" uniqKey="Duncan W">W.J. Duncan</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gizani, S" uniqKey="Gizani S">S. Gizani</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Thomason, J M" uniqKey="Thomason J">J.M. Thomason</name></author><author><name sortKey="Feine, J" uniqKey="Feine J">J. Feine</name></author><author><name sortKey="Exley, C" uniqKey="Exley C">C. Exley</name></author><author><name sortKey="Moynihan, P" uniqKey="Moynihan P">P. Moynihan</name></author><author><name sortKey="Muller, F" uniqKey="Muller F">F. Müller</name></author><author><name sortKey="Naert, I" uniqKey="Naert I">I. Naert</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Jokstad, A" uniqKey="Jokstad A">A. Jokstad</name></author><author><name sortKey="Esposito, M" uniqKey="Esposito M">M. Esposito</name></author><author><name sortKey="Coulthard, P" uniqKey="Coulthard P">P. Coulthard</name></author><author><name sortKey="Worthington, H V" uniqKey="Worthington H">H.V. Worthington</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Harwood, C L" uniqKey="Harwood C">C.L. Harwood</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Carlsson, G E" uniqKey="Carlsson G">G.E. Carlsson</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Carlsson, G E" uniqKey="Carlsson G">G.E. Carlsson</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Carlsson, G E" uniqKey="Carlsson G">G.E. Carlsson</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ortorp, A" uniqKey="Ortorp A">A. Ortorp</name></author><author><name sortKey="Omar, R" uniqKey="Omar R">R. Omar</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hyde, T P" uniqKey="Hyde T">T.P. Hyde</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mccord, J F" uniqKey="Mccord J">J.F. McCord</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Petropoulos, V C" uniqKey="Petropoulos V">V.C. Petropoulos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rashedi, B" uniqKey="Rashedi B">B. Rashedi</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Petrie, C S" uniqKey="Petrie C">C.S. Petrie</name></author><author><name sortKey="Walker, M P" uniqKey="Walker M">M.P. Walker</name></author><author><name sortKey="Williams, K" uniqKey="Williams K">K. Williams</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Al Ahmar, A O" uniqKey="Al Ahmar A">A.O. Al-Ahmar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lynch, C D" uniqKey="Lynch C">C.D. Lynch</name></author><author><name sortKey="Locke, M" uniqKey="Locke M">M. Locke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Youngson, C C" uniqKey="Youngson C">C.C. Youngson</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gray, J C" uniqKey="Gray J">J.C. Gray</name></author><author><name sortKey="Navarro Coy, N" uniqKey="Navarro Coy N">N. Navarro-Coy</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pavitt, S H" uniqKey="Pavitt S">S.H. Pavitt</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hulme, C" uniqKey="Hulme C">C. Hulme</name></author><author><name sortKey="Godfrey, M" uniqKey="Godfrey M">M. Godfrey</name></author><author><name sortKey="Craddock, H L" uniqKey="Craddock H">H.L. Craddock</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Basker, R M" uniqKey="Basker R">R.M. Basker</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Chaffee, N R" uniqKey="Chaffee N">N.R. Chaffee</name></author><author><name sortKey="Cooper, L F" uniqKey="Cooper L">L.F. Cooper</name></author><author><name sortKey="Felton, D A" uniqKey="Felton D">D.A. Felton</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Drago, C J" uniqKey="Drago C">C.J. Drago</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Firtell, D N" uniqKey="Firtell D">D.N. Firtell</name></author><author><name sortKey="Koumjian, J H" uniqKey="Koumjian J">J.H. Koumjian</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Mccord, J F" uniqKey="Mccord J">J.F. McCord</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mcnally, L M" uniqKey="Mcnally L">L.M. McNally</name></author><author><name sortKey="Smith, P W" uniqKey="Smith P">P.W. Smith</name></author><author><name sortKey="Grey, N J" uniqKey="Grey N">N.J. Grey</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kawai, Y" uniqKey="Kawai Y">Y. Kawai</name></author><author><name sortKey="Murakami, H" uniqKey="Murakami H">H. Murakami</name></author><author><name sortKey="Shariati, B" uniqKey="Shariati B">B. Shariati</name></author><author><name sortKey="Klemetti, E" uniqKey="Klemetti E">E. Klemetti</name></author><author><name sortKey="Blomfield, J V" uniqKey="Blomfield J">J.V. Blomfield</name></author><author><name sortKey="Billette, L" uniqKey="Billette L">L. Billette</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Omar, R" uniqKey="Omar R">R. Omar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Al Tarakemah, Y" uniqKey="Al Tarakemah Y">Y. Al-Tarakemah</name></author><author><name sortKey="Akbar, J" uniqKey="Akbar J">J. Akbar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Al Awadhi, S" uniqKey="Al Awadhi S">S. Al-Awadhi</name></author><author><name sortKey="Behbehani, Y" uniqKey="Behbehani Y">Y. Behbehani</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lamontagne, P" uniqKey="Lamontagne P">P. Lamontagne</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Regis, R R" uniqKey="Regis R">R.R. Regis</name></author><author><name sortKey="Cunha, T R" uniqKey="Cunha T">T.R. Cunha</name></author><author><name sortKey="Della Vecchia, M P" uniqKey="Della Vecchia M">M.P. Della Vecchia</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ribeiro, A B" uniqKey="Ribeiro A">A.B. Ribeiro</name></author><author><name sortKey="Silva Lovato, C H" uniqKey="Silva Lovato C">C.H. Silva-Lovato</name></author><author><name sortKey="De Souza, R F" uniqKey="De Souza R">R.F. de Souza</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Nu Ez, M C" uniqKey="Nu Ez M">M.C. Nuñez</name></author><author><name sortKey="Silva, D C" uniqKey="Silva D">D.C. Silva</name></author><author><name sortKey="Barcelos, B A" uniqKey="Barcelos B">B.A. Barcelos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Leles, C R" uniqKey="Leles C">C.R. Leles</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Altman, D G" uniqKey="Altman D">D.G. Altman</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bland, J M" uniqKey="Bland J">J.M. Bland</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Jones, B" uniqKey="Jones B">B. Jones</name></author><author><name sortKey="Jarvis, P" uniqKey="Jarvis P">P. Jarvis</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lewis, J A" uniqKey="Lewis J">J.A. Lewis</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ebbutt, A F" uniqKey="Ebbutt A">A.F. Ebbutt</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Dillon, S" uniqKey="Dillon S">S. Dillon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hyde, T P" uniqKey="Hyde T">T.P. Hyde</name></author><author><name sortKey="Brunton, P" uniqKey="Brunton P">P. Brunton</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Frank, R P" uniqKey="Frank R">R.P. Frank</name></author><author><name sortKey="Brudvik, J S" uniqKey="Brudvik J">J.S. Brudvik</name></author><author><name sortKey="Noonan, C J" uniqKey="Noonan C">C.J. Noonan</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Heydecke, G" uniqKey="Heydecke G">G. Heydecke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vogeler, M" uniqKey="Vogeler M">M. Vogeler</name></author><author><name sortKey="Wolkewitz, M" uniqKey="Wolkewitz M">M. Wolkewitz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Turp, J C" uniqKey="Turp J">J.C. Türp</name></author><author><name sortKey="Strub, J R" uniqKey="Strub J">J.R. Strub</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hyde, T P" uniqKey="Hyde T">T.P. Hyde</name></author><author><name sortKey="Craddock, H L" uniqKey="Craddock H">H.L. Craddock</name></author><author><name sortKey="Blance, A" uniqKey="Blance A">A. Blance</name></author><author><name sortKey="Brunton, P A" uniqKey="Brunton P">P.A. Brunton</name></author></analytic></biblStruct></listBibl></div1></back></TEI><pmc article-type="research-article"><pmc-dir>properties open_access</pmc-dir>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">J Dent</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">J Dent</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Dentistry</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">0300-5712</issn><issn pub-type="epub">1879-176X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Elsevier</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">24995473</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmc">4119301</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">S0300-5712(14)00053-0</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.005</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>A Randomised Controlled Trial of complete denture impression materials</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Hyde</surname><given-names>T.P.</given-names></name><email>t.p.hyde@leeds.ac.uk</email><xref rid="aff0040" ref-type="aff">a</xref><xref rid="cor0005" ref-type="corresp">⁎</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Craddock</surname><given-names>H.L.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0005" ref-type="aff">b</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Gray</surname><given-names>J.C.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0010" ref-type="aff">c</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Pavitt</surname><given-names>S.H.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0015" ref-type="aff">d</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Hulme</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0020" ref-type="aff">e</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Godfrey</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0025" ref-type="aff">f</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Fernandez</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0010" ref-type="aff">c</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Navarro-Coy</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0035" ref-type="aff">g</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Dillon</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0040" ref-type="aff">a</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Wright</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0035" ref-type="aff">g</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Brown</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0010" ref-type="aff">c</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Dukanovic</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0045" ref-type="aff">h</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Brunton</surname><given-names>P.A.</given-names></name><xref rid="aff0040" ref-type="aff">a</xref><xref rid="aff0050" ref-type="aff">i</xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff0040"><label>a</label>Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</aff><aff id="aff0005"><label>b</label>University of Aberdeen Dental School, Cornhill Road, Aberdeen AB25 2ZR, UK</aff><aff id="aff0010"><label>c</label>Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</aff><aff id="aff0015"><label>d</label>Applied Health Research, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</aff><aff id="aff0020"><label>e</label>Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</aff><aff id="aff0025"><label>f</label>Health and Social Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK</aff><aff id="aff0035"><label>g</label>Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK</aff><aff id="aff0045"><label>h</label>Dental Translational Clinical Research Unit (DenTCRU), Leeds Dental institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9LU, UK</aff><aff id="aff0050"><label>i</label>Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand</aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor0005"><label>⁎</label><italic>Corresponding author</italic>. Tel.: +44 113 343 8515. <email>t.p.hyde@leeds.ac.uk</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="pmc-release"><day>1</day><month>8</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><pmc-comment> PMC Release delay is 0 months and 0 days and was based on .</pmc-comment>
<pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>8</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><volume>42</volume><issue>8</issue><fpage>895</fpage><lpage>901</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>2</day><month>10</month><year>2013</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>7</day><month>2</month><year>2014</year></date><date date-type="accepted"><day>11</day><month>2</month><year>2014</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>© 2014 The Authors</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license license-type="CC BY-NC-SA" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/"><license-p>This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-SA license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/).</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><sec><title>Objectives</title><p>There is continuing demand for non-implant prosthodontic treatment and yet there is a paucity of high quality Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) evidence for best practice. The aim of this research was to provide evidence for best practice in prosthodontic impressions by comparing two impression materials in a double-blind, randomised, crossover, controlled, clinical trial.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>Eighty-five patients were recruited, using published eligibility criteria, to the trial at Leeds Dental Institute, UK. Each patient received two sets of dentures; made using either alginate or silicone impressions. Randomisations determined the order of assessment and order of impressions. The primary outcome was patient blinded preference for unadjusted dentures. Secondary outcomes were patient preference for the adjusted dentures, rating of comfort, stability and chewing efficiency, experience of each impression, and an OHIP-EDENT questionnaire.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>Seventy-eight (91.8%) patients completed the primary assessment. 53(67.9%) patients preferred dentures made from silicone impressions while 14(17.9%) preferred alginate impressions. 4(5.1%) patients found both dentures equally satisfactory and 7 (9.0%) found both equally unsatisfactory. There was a 50% difference in preference rates (in favour of silicone) (95%CI 32.7–67.3%, <italic>p</italic> < 0.0001).</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>There is significant evidence that dentures made from silicone impressions were preferred by patients.</p></sec><sec><title>Clinical significance</title><p>Given the strength of the clinical findings within this paper, dentists should consider choosing silicone rather than alginate as their material of choice for secondary impressions for complete dentures.</p><p>Trial Registration: ISRCTN 01528038.
</p><p>This article forms part of a project for which the author (TPH) won the Senior Clinical Unilever Hatton Award of the International Assocation for Dental Research, Capetown, South Africa, June 2014.</p></sec></abstract><kwd-group><title>Keywords</title><kwd>Prosthodontics</kwd><kwd>Quality-of life</kwd><kwd>Patient outcomes</kwd><kwd>Impression materials</kwd><kwd>Edentulous</kwd><kwd>Removable prosthodontics</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec sec-type="intro" id="sec0005"><label>1</label><title>Introduction</title><p>Although the treatment of edentulous patients has been transformed by the introduction of implants, the barriers to implant treatment are known and have been explored in the literature.<xref rid="bib0005 bib0010" ref-type="bibr"><sup>1,2</sup></xref> The barriers are related to the cost of treatment, the fear of surgery and ageism. Even when implants were offered free, more than a third of the patients rejected this option.<xref rid="bib0015" ref-type="bibr"><sup>3</sup></xref> 28% of edentulous patients were not suitable to receive implants in a clinical trial.<xref rid="bib0020" ref-type="bibr"><sup>4</sup></xref> Although the best treatment option for patients often involves implants,<xref rid="bib0025 bib0030" ref-type="bibr"><sup>5,6</sup></xref> the current reality is that a majority of patients are unsuitable for implants or opt for non-implant treatment due to cost or fear of surgery. The option of traditional prosthodontics remains the staple provision for tooth replacement for many patients.</p><p>Given the high incidence in the use of non-implant treatment, there is a continuing need for high quality research evidence to inform the dentist and patients of the best methods of producing the required prosthesis. The systematic reviews of Jokstad<xref rid="bib0035" ref-type="bibr"><sup>7</sup></xref> and of Harwood<xref rid="bib0040" ref-type="bibr"><sup>8</sup></xref> show that it is in this area of clinical technique for traditional prosthodontics that there remains a particular paucity of high quality Randomised Controlled Trial's (RCTs). This lack of research has been highlighted by Carlsson.<xref rid="bib0045 bib0050 bib0055" ref-type="bibr"><sup>9–11</sup></xref> Much of our knowledge of current “best practice” in prosthodontics is based on experience and tradition argued from a position of first principles rather than high quality evidence from RCT research. As a result our belief in what constitutes “best practice” can vary from one teaching tradition, one dental school, one culture, to another.</p><p>A survey of impression materials for complete dentures in the UK<xref rid="bib0060" ref-type="bibr"><sup>12</sup></xref> demonstrated that the majority of dentists report the use of alginate as the material of choice for the definitive secondary impression material for complete dentures. This contrasts with the position both practiced and taught<xref rid="bib0065 bib0070" ref-type="bibr"><sup>13,14</sup></xref> in USA dental schools and found in UK private denture laboratories.<xref rid="bib0075" ref-type="bibr"><sup>15</sup></xref> It is implied by these surveys that experts use alternatives to alginate. Dentists have a choice of materials for making dental impressions but there is a dearth of RCT evidence to inform their choice, highlighting the need for robust RCT research.</p><p>The primary aim for this RCT is to establish whether there is a patient preference for dentures produced from alginate or silicone impressions.The secondary objectives are<list list-type="simple"><list-item id="lsti0005"><label>1.</label><p>To assess the impact of dentures produced from alginate and silicone impressions on oral health related quality of life.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0010"><label>2.</label><p>To assess comfort, stability and chewing efficiency for dentures produced from alginate or silicone impressions.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0015"><label>3.</label><p>To assess patients’ experience of having impressions made using alginate and silicone impression materials.</p></list-item></list></p></sec><sec sec-type="methods" id="sec0010"><label>2</label><title>Method</title><p>This research was carried out in the Dental Translational Clinical Research Unit (DenTCRU) at Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds under the auspices of the Leeds Clinical Trial Research Unit (CTRU). It was a single centre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, crossover clinical trial of alginate and silicone impressions for complete dentures. Full details of the trial protocol can be found in the pre-published protocol paper.<xref rid="bib0080" ref-type="bibr"><sup>16</sup></xref> There were no major deviations from the published protocol. Ethical approval was obtained through the UK Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) system from Leeds (West) Research Ethics Committee in February 2010 and written informed consent was obtained from all patients.</p><p>Eligible participants were edentulous adults aged 18 or over who required new complete dentures, were available for follow up and able and willing to complete the informed consent process. Patients were excluded if they had an oral tumour, required an obturator, had extreme xerostomia, had a known hypersensitivity to silicone or alginate or would benefit from selective pressure impressions.</p><p>A sample size calculation revealed that 76 patients would have 80% power to detect a difference in preference rates of 30% between the two dentures (30% versus 60%) at a significance level of 5%, assuming that 10% of patients express no preference. A total of 85 patients were recruited overall to allow for a dropout rate of 10%, consistent with previous studies.</p><p>All 85 patients were recruited from primary care referrals to the Leeds Dental Institute. Patients received two sets of dentures, one set of dentures made from impressions taken with silicone the other set made from alginate impressions.</p><p>Two sets of acrylic, spaced, and customised impression trays with stub handles and acrylic “stops” were constructed for each patient. The spacing of the customised trays was achieved in the usual way of adapting a layer of denture wax over the primary cast and constructing the customised trays over the wax.<xref rid="bib0085" ref-type="bibr"><sup>17</sup></xref> Where there was deep hard tissue undercut on the casts this was reduced by blocking out the undercut in wax prior to laying down the spacer. The trays were identical and labelled A and B. During impression making, the trays which were used first (A or B) and the impression material which was used first (alginate of silicone) was randomised. The randomisation was blocked by variable block sizes to ensure balance between groups and concealed in sequentially numbered sealed envelopes by the CTRU statistician and securely stored in the randomisation locker at DenTCRU. The envelope containing the tray randomisations was opened by authorised members of the research team after the ‘blind’ adjustment of both sets of impression trays to remove over extensions.</p><p>The trays to be used for the alginate impression were border moulded with green stick impression compound (Kerr) in the usual way<xref rid="bib0085" ref-type="bibr"><sup>17</sup></xref> and the alginate impressions taken (Xantalgin, Heraeus). The trays used for silicone impressions were border moulded in silicone, using heavy bodied for the upper (Extrude, Kerr) and regular bodied for the lower (Express, 3M ESPE) and the impression taken with light bodied silicone (Express, 3M ESPE). The border moulding materials selected were those advocated by expert opinion for each impression material.<xref rid="bib0085 bib0090" ref-type="bibr"><sup>17,18</sup></xref> A retrospective audit by Drago<xref rid="bib0095" ref-type="bibr"><sup>19</sup></xref> was unable to detect a difference in the use of these materials for border moulding. The quality of the impressions was assessed by the clinician and by a second independent inspector. If either the clinician or the second independent assessor felt an impression was below an acceptable standard, the clinician re-took the impression.</p><p>The master casts were poured in the dental laboratory and the casts cleaned to remove all traces of impression material. The casts were allocated a number (blind to the clinician) which allowed the later identification of the dentures. At all subsequent stages of denture construction the clinician was blind to the impression material used.</p><p>The completed unadjusted dentures were labelled by random allocation with blue and red dots. The randomisation was blocked by variable block sizes to ensure balance between groups and concealed in sequentially numbered envelopes created by the statistician and securely stored in the randomisation locker at DenTCRU. Half the red dot dentures were from alginate impressions and half from silicone; similarly for the blue dot dentures. Patients were given both sets of unadjusted dentures and asked to follow a structured programme of alternate wearing of the dentures, starting with the red dentures, for a two-week ‘Habituation Period’. Thus the dentures worn first during this period was determined by the randomisation defined by the colour code allocation. The ‘Habituation Period’ allowed patients to become accustomed to the new dentures and assess their preference for the unadjusted dentures (primary outcome).</p><p>Following the initial assessment of the dentures (primary outcome) the dentures were relabelled by green or yellow coloured dots by randomised allocation. It was blocked (variable block sizes) and balanced for order of testing in the initial ‘Habituation Period’. This was administered centrally by the CTRU using an automated 24-h telephone system. Patients then wore the newly coded dentures sequentially in 2 periods of 8 weeks each (‘Adjustment Period’), during which time, the patients returned to the DenTCRU for any adjustments they required. All necessary adjustments were made by a second independent, blind clinician. The 1:1 randomisation coded by the yellow or green dots established the order of testing during the ‘Adjustment Periods’. The patients and the clinical team were blind to these allocations. Finally, patients took both sets of dentures for a final two week period (‘Confirmation Period’) at the end of which they returned for the final assessment.</p><p>The primary outcome assessed was:<list list-type="simple"><list-item id="lsti0020"><label>1.</label><p>The patients’ preference for the unadjusted dentures following the 2 weeks ‘Habituation Period’.</p></list-item></list></p><p>Secondary outcome assessments were:<list list-type="simple"><list-item id="lsti0025"><label>1.</label><p>Patient perception of denture comfort, stability and chewing efficiency of the dentures using 5-point Likert scales.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0030"><label>2.</label><p>Patients’ preference for the adjusted dentures following the 2 week ‘Confirmation Period’.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0035"><label>3.</label><p>OHIP-EDENT questionnaires assessing the patient oral health related quality of life following each Adjustment Period.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0040"><label>4.</label><p>Patient perception of comfort and taste of each impression material using 5-point Likert scale at the impression stage.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0045"><label>5.</label><p>Patient preference for the impression of materials at the impression stage Baseline OHIP-EDENT questionnaires were completed by the patients prior to denture construction.</p></list-item></list></p><sec id="sec0015"><label>2.1</label><title>Statistical methods</title><p>The comparison of the proportions of patients preferring dentures made from alginate impressions to those preferring dentures made from silicone impressions was presented in a 2 × 2 table for paired data and analysed using McNemar's test. This analysis was used at both the primary end point (after the habituation period, for the unadjusted dentures) and at the end of the trial (for the adjusted dentures). OHIP-EDENT scores were analysed using a Wilcoxon Rank Sum test to compare scores between denture impression materials (due to non-normality of the data). The period and carry-over effects were also tested using Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests. Assessments of the Likert scale assessments of the dentures used the Wilcoxon test for matched pairs.</p></sec></sec><sec sec-type="results" id="sec0020"><label>3</label><title>Results</title><p>Eighty-five patients were recruited from April 2010 to April 2012; follow-up finished January 2013. 59 (69.4%) of the patients were female, 77 (90.6%) white, with a mean age of 69.4(SD 10.87). <xref rid="fig0005" ref-type="fig">Fig. 1</xref> shows a flow diagram of patients’ progression through the trial. There were no serious unexpected adverse events that were related to trial procedures.</p><sec id="sec0025"><label>3.1</label><title>Primary outcome</title><p>78 (91.8%) patients completed the primary assessment. 53 (67.9%) patients preferred dentures made from silicone impressions while 14 (17.9%) preferred alginate impressions. 4(5.1%) patients who found both dentures equally satisfactory and 7(9.0%) found both equally unsatisfactory. There was a 50% difference in preference rates (in favour of silicone) (95% CI 32.7–67.3%, <italic>p</italic> < 0.0001 McNemar's test) <xref rid="tbl0005" ref-type="table">Table 1</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="sec0030"><label>3.2</label><title>Secondary outcomes</title><p><list list-type="simple"><list-item id="lsti0050"><label>1.</label><p>After the ‘Habituation Period’ (i.e. before substantial denture adjustment), the patient reported assessment of the ‘Comfort’, ‘Stability’ and ‘Chewing Efficiency’ of the dentures showed significant evidence that unadjusted dentures made from silicone impressions were rated as more comfortable (<italic>p</italic> = 0.0039), more stable (<italic>p</italic> = 0.0047) and more efficient for chewing (<italic>p</italic> < 0.0001) than unadjusted dentures made from alginate impressions (<xref rid="tbl0010" ref-type="table">Table 2</xref>).</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0055"><label>2.</label><p>After the confirmation period there was a 33.8% difference in preference rates for the adjusted dentures (in favour of silicone) (95% CI 14.3–53.3%, <italic>p</italic> = 0.0016) (see <xref rid="tbl0005" ref-type="table">Table 1</xref>).</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0060"><label>3.</label><p>After the ‘Confirmation’ period, the patient reported assessment of the ‘Comfort’, ‘Stability’ and ‘Chewing Efficiency’ of the dentures showed there was again no evidence of a difference in comfort rating between silicone and alginate impression materials (<italic>p</italic> = 0.5417). However, there was significant evidence that dentures made from silicone impressions were rated as more stable (<italic>p</italic> = 0.0066) and more efficient (<italic>p</italic> = 0.0010) than dentures made from alginate impressions after adjustment (see <xref rid="tbl0010" ref-type="table">Table 2</xref>).</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0065"><label>4.</label><p>After wearing the dentures for the two 8 week Adjustment Periods, there was significant evidence that the OHIP-EDENT score was lower (better oral health related quality of life) after wearing dentures made with silicone impressions materials with a median reduction in score of 5.5 units (<italic>p</italic> = 0.0014) (see <xref rid="tbl0015" ref-type="table">Table 3</xref>). There was no evidence of a period effect (<italic>p</italic> = 0.2105) or carry-over effect (<italic>p</italic> = 0.5295).</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0070"><label>5.</label><p>There was significant evidence from the patient reported Likert scores that silicone impressions were more comfortable than alginate impressions (<italic>p</italic> = 0.0021) but no evidence of a difference in taste between the two impression materials (<italic>p</italic> = 0.1128). An additional post hoc statistical analysis using McNemar's test showed there was a 28.9% difference in patient preference rates for having their impression taken in silicone (95% CI 11.1–46.8%, <italic>p</italic> = 0.0027).</p></list-item></list></p></sec></sec><sec sec-type="discussion" id="sec0035"><label>4</label><title>Discussion</title><p>This trial has produced definitive answers to a pertinent clinical question. Previous attempts at RCTs for dental impression materials have been scarce<xref rid="bib0100 bib0105" ref-type="bibr"><sup>20,21</sup></xref> and have not yielded definitive answers to their research questions. Thus the lack of RCTs of impression materials is compounded by the inability of previous RCTs to find a clinically significant difference between the impression materials. This inability of prosthodontic RCTs to detect a difference extends to areas beyond RCTs of impression materials.</p><p>In addition to the trials of impression materials, there have been a number of prospective RCTs which have addressed the issue of ‘simplified’ denture impression techniques compared to conventional techniques.<xref rid="bib0110 bib0115 bib0120 bib0125" ref-type="bibr"><sup>22–25</sup></xref> The ‘simplified’ single stage impression in a stock tray compared with various two stage impression techniques showed no significant difference between the trial arms. Of course the inability to detect a difference should not automatically lead to the assumption of equivalence; absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.<xref rid="bib0130" ref-type="bibr"><sup>26</sup></xref> None of these trials were designed as an equivalence study (which have particular design issues to avoid establishing equivalence through poor adherence and underpowering amongst other issues<xref rid="bib0135" ref-type="bibr"><sup>27</sup></xref>). It may also be that the protocols used were incapable of detecting a clinically significant difference. Protocols for prosthodontic trials would benefit from a wider discussion in academic literature.</p><p>Currently, there are a number of issues with prosthodontic protocols that may provide underlying reasons why clinically significant differences are not produced in RCTs. Prosthodontic trials can have numerous specific confounding variables such as patient related factors (e.g. ridge form, saliva flow, mucosal quality, patient expectation, psychological profile, perceived aesthetics), technical construction factors (e.g. occlusal form, impression technique, processing methods, different technicians/technical procedures, the full use, or not, of the recorded sulcus depth) and dentist related factors (e.g. ability, education, number of clinicians, velocity of seating of the impression).</p><p>Randomisation by minimisation will usually reduce the potential impact of these variables, however the particular nature and volume of potential prosthodontic confounders does mean this problem is more pronounced in this field and parallel group RCTs will need very large numbers of patients to eliminate the problem. Alternatively, a cross over protocol (where patients effectively become their own control) using a very careful denture duplication protocol<xref rid="bib0140" ref-type="bibr"><sup>28</sup></xref> will eliminate many potential confounders, ensuring that the only difference between the two sets of dentures is the single issue under investigation.</p><p>The results reported within this paper have shown that patients’ perceptions of their dentures in relation to comfort were changed after the adjustment of the dentures; this was anticipated as a potential effect of adjustment. The results show that before adjustment the patients rated the silicone dentures as more comfortable than the alginate dentures, whereas after adjustment the trial was unable to detect a significant difference in the patients’ assessment of comfort. Adjusting the dentures effectively eliminated a difference in comfort ratings between the dentures. In other trials,<xref rid="bib0110 bib0120 bib0125" ref-type="bibr"><sup>22,24,25</sup></xref> the use of assessment at the post-adjustment stage alone (e.g. at 3 months and 6 months) coincides with a failure to differentiate between groups. Post adjustment assessments when reported on their own may not adequately describe the clinical situation. It is appropriate to report assessments both pre and post adjustment since both are clinically relevant. Where post adjustment assessments are reported on their own, it would be good practice to also report the extent of the adjustments required on each side of the trial, to allow the reader to assess if any preferential adjustment of the dentures has taken place.</p><p>Use of expert opinion and/or expert assessment of the quality of dentures in RCTs have been ineffective<xref rid="bib0115 bib0145" ref-type="bibr"><sup>23,29</sup></xref> and may be inappropriate. There is a paradox here in using expert opinion (which is regarded as having low evidence value) to determine an outcome of an RCT (which is regarded as having high evidence value). Instead, it is proposed that blind, patient derived and patient centred outcome measures (for example, patients preferred denture, or OHIPs) are used as a more selective and clinically relevant primary outcome in future crossover trials.</p><p>The issue of simplified versus conventional dentures may be usefully broken down into two separate areas; the first related to simplified impressions and the second related to simplified occlusion. Doing so is useful since the two issues can and should be addressed separately. For instance it may be that separate investigations find that simplified occlusions are superior but simplified impressions are not (or vice a versa). If the ‘simplified technique’ improves one aspect of denture construction but makes another aspect worse, the effects will cancel out and investigating both issues simultaneously in a single study will lead to confounded results. This is an area of potential future investigations and when correctly powered the protocols, from Heydecke<xref rid="bib0150" ref-type="bibr"><sup>30</sup></xref> (for occlusion), Gray<xref rid="bib0080" ref-type="bibr"><sup>16</sup></xref> and Hyde<xref rid="bib0155" ref-type="bibr"><sup>31</sup></xref> provide a potential way forward.</p><p>In summary, there are problems designing effective protocols in the field of prosthodontic research. The authors of this paper take the view that the inability of prosthodontic RCTs to detect a clinical difference can be limited by a careful protocol design which includes:<list list-type="simple"><list-item id="lsti0075"><label>1.</label><p>a cross over randomisation,</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0080"><label>2.</label><p>a careful denture duplication process,</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0085"><label>3.</label><p>the blinding of clinicians and patients,</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0090"><label>4.</label><p>the reporting of both pre and post adjustment assessments and</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0095"><label>5.</label><p>a primary outcome measure centred on patient preference.</p></list-item></list></p><p>Following these principles this trial has differentiated between dentures constructed on secondary impression taken with either silicone or alginate. This protocol has potential to be a useful tool to look at other areas of prosthodontic treatment.</p><sec id="sec0040"><label>4.1</label><title>Clinical implications</title><p>In view of the strength of the outcomes of this trial, dentists should consider replacing alginate with silicone as the material of choice for secondary impressions for complete dentures.</p></sec></sec><sec sec-type="conclusions" id="sec0045"><label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title><p><list list-type="simple"><list-item id="lsti0100"><label>1.</label><p>Dentures made from silicone impressions were preferred by patients over dentures constructed from alginate impressions, both before and after the dentures were adjusted.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0105"><label>2.</label><p>Overall patients preferred the experience of having impressions taken in silicone, finding silicone impressions more comfortable; however there was no preference for the taste of either material.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0110"><label>3.</label><p>Patients’ oral health related quality of life was better after wearing dentures made from silicone impressions.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0115"><label>4.</label><p>Unadjusted dentures made from silicone impressions were more comfortable, stable and efficient for chewing.</p></list-item><list-item id="lsti0120"><label>5.</label><p>After adjustment, the dentures made from silicone impressions remained more stable and efficient for chewing. However, the adjustment of the dentures resulted in no detectable difference in comfort between the dentures.</p></list-item></list></p></sec><sec id="sec0050"><title>Funding</title><p>Funded by <funding-source id="gs0005">NIHR-RfPB</funding-source> grant number PB-PG-0408-16300.</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="bib0005"><label>1</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0005"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Müller</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Salem</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Barbezat</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Herrmann</surname><given-names>F.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Schimmel</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Knowledge and attitude of elderly persons towards dental implants</article-title><source>Gerodontology</source><volume>29</volume><year>2012</year><fpage>914</fpage><lpage>923</lpage></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0010"><label>2</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0010"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ellis</surname><given-names>J.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Levine</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bedos</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mojon</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rosberger</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Feine</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Refusal of implant supported mandibular overdentures by elderly patients</article-title><source>Gerodontology</source><volume>28</volume><year>2011</year><fpage>62</fpage><lpage>68</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20545777</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0015"><label>3</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0015"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Walton</surname><given-names>J.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>MacEntee</surname><given-names>M.I.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Choosing or refusing oral implants: a prospective study of edentulous volunteers for a clinical trial</article-title><source>International Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>18</volume><year>2005</year><fpage>483</fpage><lpage>488</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16335167</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0020"><label>4</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0020"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Walton</surname><given-names>J.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>MacEntee</surname><given-names>M.I.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Screening and enrolling subjects in a randomized clinical trial involving implant dentures</article-title><source>International Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>21</volume><year>2008</year><fpage>210</fpage><lpage>214</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18548957</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0025"><label>5</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0025"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Feine</surname><given-names>J.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Carlsson</surname><given-names>G.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Awad</surname><given-names>M.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chehade</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Duncan</surname><given-names>W.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gizani</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The McGill consensus statement on overdentures</article-title><source>International Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>15</volume><year>2002</year><fpage>413</fpage><lpage>414</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12170858</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0030"><label>6</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0030"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Thomason</surname><given-names>J.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Feine</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Exley</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Moynihan</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Müller</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Naert</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Mandibular two implant supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients – the York Consensus Statement</article-title><source>British Dental Journal</source><volume>207</volume><year>2009</year><fpage>185</fpage><lpage>186</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19696851</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0035"><label>7</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0035"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jokstad</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Esposito</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Coulthard</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Worthington</surname><given-names>H.V.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The reporting of randomized controlled trials in prosthodontics</article-title><source>International Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>15</volume><year>2002</year><fpage>230</fpage><lpage>242</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12066485</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0040"><label>8</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0040"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Harwood</surname><given-names>C.L.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The evidence base for current practices in prosthodontics</article-title><source>European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry</source><volume>16</volume><year>2008</year><fpage>24</fpage><lpage>34</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18468322</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0045"><label>9</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0045"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Carlsson</surname><given-names>G.E.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Facts and fallacies: an evidence base for complete dentures</article-title><source>Dental Update</source><volume>33</volume><year>2006</year><comment>134–6, 138–40, 142</comment></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0050"><label>10</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0050"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Carlsson</surname><given-names>G.E.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Critical review of some dogmas in prosthodontics</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthodontic Research</source><volume>53</volume><year>2009</year><fpage>3</fpage><lpage>10</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19318064</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0055"><label>11</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0055"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Carlsson</surname><given-names>G.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ortorp</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Omar</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>What is the evidence base for the efficacies of different complete denture impression procedures? A critical review</article-title><source>Journal of Dentistry</source><volume>41</volume><year>2013</year><fpage>5</fpage></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0060"><label>12</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0060"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hyde</surname><given-names>T.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>McCord</surname><given-names>J.F.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Survey of prosthodontic impression procedures for complete dentures in general dental practice in the United Kingdom</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</source><volume>81</volume><year>1999</year><fpage>295</fpage><lpage>299</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10050117</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0065"><label>13</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0065"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Petropoulos</surname><given-names>V.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rashedi</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Current concepts and techniques in complete denture final impression procedures</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>12</volume><year>2003</year><fpage>280</fpage><lpage>287</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15061238</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0070"><label>14</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0070"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Petrie</surname><given-names>C.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Walker</surname><given-names>M.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Williams</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>A survey of U.S. prosthodontists and dental schools on the current materials and methods for final impressions for complete denture prosthodontics</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>14</volume><year>2005</year><fpage>253</fpage><lpage>262</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16359482</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0075"><label>15</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0075"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Al-Ahmar</surname><given-names>A.O.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lynch</surname><given-names>C.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Locke</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Youngson</surname><given-names>C.C.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Quality of master impressions and related materials for fabrication of complete dentures in the UK</article-title><source>Journal of Oral Rehabilitation</source><volume>35</volume><year>2008</year><fpage>111</fpage><lpage>115</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18053059</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0080"><label>16</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0080"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gray</surname><given-names>J.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Navarro-Coy</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pavitt</surname><given-names>S.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hulme</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Godfrey</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Craddock</surname><given-names>H.L.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>2012 improvdent: improving dentures for patient benefit. A crossover randomised clinical trial comparing impression materials for complete dentures</article-title><source>BioMed Central Oral Health</source><volume>12</volume><year>2012</year><fpage>37</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22937901</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0085"><label>17</label><element-citation publication-type="book" id="sbref0085"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Basker</surname><given-names>R.M.</given-names></name></person-group><chapter-title>Prosthetic treatment of the edentulous patient</chapter-title><edition>4th ed.</edition><year>2002</year><publisher-name>Blackwell Publishing Company</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0090"><label>18</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0090"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chaffee</surname><given-names>N.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cooper</surname><given-names>L.F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Felton</surname><given-names>D.A.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>A technique for border molding edentulous impressions using vinyl polysiloxane material</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>8</volume><year>1999</year><fpage>129</fpage><lpage>134</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10740512</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0095"><label>19</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0095"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Drago</surname><given-names>C.J.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>A retrospective comparison of two definitive impression techniques and their associated postinsertion adjustments in complete denture prosthodontics</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthodontics</source><volume>12</volume><year>2003</year><fpage>192</fpage><lpage>197</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14508741</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0100"><label>20</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0100"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Firtell</surname><given-names>D.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Koumjian</surname><given-names>J.H.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Mandibular complete denture impressions with fluid wax or polysulfide rubber: a comparative study</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</source><volume>67</volume><year>1992</year><fpage>801</fpage><lpage>804</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">1403864</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0105"><label>21</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0105"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>McCord</surname><given-names>J.F.</given-names></name><name><surname>McNally</surname><given-names>L.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>P.W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Grey</surname><given-names>N.J.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Does the nature of the definitive impression material influence the outcome of (mandibular) complete dentures?</article-title><source>European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry</source><volume>13</volume><year>2005</year><fpage>105</fpage><lpage>108</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16180634</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0110"><label>22</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0110"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kawai</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Murakami</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Shariati</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Klemetti</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Blomfield</surname><given-names>J.V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Billette</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Do traditional techniques produce better conventional complete dentures than simplified techniques?</article-title><source>Journal of Dentistry</source><volume>33</volume><year>2005</year><fpage>659</fpage><lpage>668</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16139697</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0115"><label>23</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0115"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Omar</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Al-Tarakemah</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Akbar</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Al-Awadhi</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Behbehani</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lamontagne</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Influence of procedural variations during the laboratory phase of complete denture fabrication on patient satisfaction and denture quality</article-title><source>Journal of Dentistry</source><volume>41</volume><year>2013</year><fpage>852</fpage><lpage>860</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23911602</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0120"><label>24</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0120"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Regis</surname><given-names>R.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cunha</surname><given-names>T.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Della Vecchia</surname><given-names>M.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ribeiro</surname><given-names>A.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Silva-Lovato</surname><given-names>C.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>de Souza</surname><given-names>R.F.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>A randomised trial of a simplified method for complete denture fabrication: patient perception and quality</article-title><source>Journal of Oral Rehabilitation</source><volume>40</volume><year>2013</year><fpage>535</fpage><lpage>545</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23663152</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0125"><label>25</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0125"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nuñez</surname><given-names>M.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Silva</surname><given-names>D.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Barcelos</surname><given-names>B.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Leles</surname><given-names>C.R.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life after treatment with traditional and simplified protocols for complete denture construction</article-title><source>Gerodontology</source><year>2013, October</year><comment>[Epub ahead of print]</comment></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0130"><label>26</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0130"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Altman</surname><given-names>D.G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bland</surname><given-names>J.M.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence</article-title><source>British Medical Journal</source><volume>19311</volume><year>1995</year><fpage>485</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">7647644</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0135"><label>27</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0135"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jones</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jarvis</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lewis</surname><given-names>J.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ebbutt</surname><given-names>A.F.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rigorous methods</article-title><source>British Medical Journal</source><volume>313</volume><year>1996</year><fpage>36</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8664772</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0140"><label>28</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0140"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dillon</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hyde</surname><given-names>T.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Brunton</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>A technique to construct duplicate dentures for clinical research</article-title><source>Quintessence Journal of Dental Technology</source><volume>6</volume><year>2008</year><fpage>30</fpage><lpage>39</lpage></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0145"><label>29</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0145"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Frank</surname><given-names>R.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Brudvik</surname><given-names>J.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Noonan</surname><given-names>C.J.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Clinical outcome of the altered cast impression procedure compared with use of a one-piece cast</article-title><source>Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</source><volume>91</volume><year>2004</year><fpage>468</fpage><lpage>476</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15153855</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0150"><label>30</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0150"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Heydecke</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Vogeler</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wolkewitz</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Türp</surname><given-names>J.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Strub</surname><given-names>J.R.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Simplified versus comprehensive fabrication of complete dentures: patient ratings of denture satisfaction from a randomized crossover trial</article-title><source>Quintessence International</source><volume>39</volume><year>2008</year><fpage>107</fpage><lpage>116</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18560649</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="bib0155"><label>31</label><element-citation publication-type="journal" id="sbref0155"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hyde</surname><given-names>T.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Craddock</surname><given-names>H.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Blance</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Brunton</surname><given-names>P.A.</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>A cross-over randomised controlled trial of selective pressure impressions for lower complete dentures</article-title><source>Journal of Dentistry</source><volume>38</volume><year>2010</year><fpage>853</fpage><lpage>858</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20637826</pub-id></element-citation></ref></ref-list><ack id="ack0005"><title>Acknowledgments</title><p>This paper presents independent research funded by the <funding-source id="gs0010">National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)</funding-source> under its Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme (Grant Reference Number PB-PG-0408-16300). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health (UK).</p></ack></back><floats-group><fig id="fig0005"><label>Fig. 1</label><caption><p>CONSORT flow diagram showing patients progression through the phases of the trial.</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="gr1"></graphic></fig><table-wrap id="tbl0005" position="float"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p>Patient preference of the dentures before and after adjustment.</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th></th><th colspan="3" align="center">Silicone<hr></hr></th></tr><tr><th></th><th align="center">Prefer/satisfactory</th><th align="center">Not prefer/unsatisfactory</th><th align="center">Total</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="4" align="left"><italic>Patient denture preference before denture adjustment (after Habituation Period)</italic></td></tr><tr><td colspan="4" align="left">Alginate</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Prefer/satisfactory</td><td align="char">4 (5.1%)</td><td align="char">14 (17.9%)</td><td align="char">18 (23.1%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Not prefer/unsatisfactory</td><td align="char">53 (67.9%)</td><td align="char">7 (9.0%)</td><td align="char">60 (76.9%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total</td><td align="char">57 (73.1%)</td><td align="char">21 (26.9%)</td><td align="char">78 (100.0%)</td></tr></tbody></table><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th></th><th colspan="3" align="center">Silicone<hr></hr></th></tr><tr><th></th><th align="center">Prefer/satisfactory</th><th align="center">Not prefer/unsatisfactory</th><th align="center">Total</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="4" align="left"><italic>Patient denture preference after denture adjustment (after Confirmation Period)</italic></td></tr><tr><td colspan="4" align="left">Alginate</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Prefer/satisfactory</td><td align="char">7 (9.9%)</td><td align="char">17 (23.9%)</td><td align="char">24 (33.8%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Not prefer/unsatisfactory</td><td align="char">41 (57.7%)</td><td align="char">6 (8.5%)</td><td align="char">47 (66.2%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total</td><td align="char">48 (67.6%)</td><td align="char">23 (32.4%)</td><td align="char">71 (100.0%)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="tbl0010" position="float"><label>Table 2</label><caption><p>Differences in comfort, stability and chewing efficiency of dentures by Likert scores.</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left">A total of 80 patients reached Habituation</th><th align="center">Comfort <italic>N</italic> (%)</th><th align="center">Stability <italic>N</italic> (%)</th><th align="center">Efficiency <italic>N</italic> (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="4" align="left"><italic>Before denture adjustment (after Habituation Period):</italic></td></tr><tr><td colspan="4" align="left">Difference in score (Silicone–Alginate)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">−4 to −2</td><td align="char">19 (23.8%)</td><td align="char">15 (18.8%)</td><td align="char">18 (22.5%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">−1</td><td align="char">21 (26.3%)</td><td align="char">16 (20.0%)</td><td align="char">16 (20.0%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">0</td><td align="char">25 (31.3%)</td><td align="char">38 (47.5%)</td><td align="char">40 (50.0%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1</td><td align="char">4 (5.0%)</td><td align="char">3 (3.8%)</td><td align="char">0 (0.0%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2–3</td><td align="char">9 (11.3%)</td><td align="char">6 (7.5%)</td><td align="char">4 (5.0%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">2 (2.5%)</td><td align="char">2 (2.5%)</td><td align="char">2 (2.5%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total</td><td align="char">80 (100.0%)</td><td align="char">80 (100.0%)</td><td align="char">80 (100.0%)</td></tr></tbody></table><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left">A total of 72 patients reached Confirmation</th><th align="center">Comfort <italic>N</italic> (%)</th><th align="center">Stability <italic>N</italic> (%)</th><th align="center">Efficiency <italic>N</italic> (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="4" align="left"><italic>After denture adjustment (after Confirmation Period):</italic></td></tr><tr><td colspan="4" align="left">Difference in score (Silicone–Alginate)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">−4 to −2</td><td align="char">10 (13.9%)</td><td align="char">10 (13.9%)</td><td align="char">12 (16.7%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">−1</td><td align="char">12 (16.7%)</td><td align="char">16 (22.2%)</td><td align="char">12 (16.7%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">0</td><td align="char">30 (41.7%)</td><td align="char">35 (48.6%)</td><td align="char">39 (54.2%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">1</td><td align="char">12 (16.7%)</td><td align="char">7 (9.7%)</td><td align="char">6 (8.3%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2–3</td><td align="char">7 (9.7%)</td><td align="char">3 (4.2%)</td><td align="char">2 (2.8%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">1 (1.4%)</td><td align="char">1 (1.4%)</td><td align="char">1 (1.4%)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Total</td><td align="char">72 (100.0%)</td><td align="char">72 (100.0%)</td><td align="char">72 (100.0%)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="tbl0015" position="float"><label>Table 3</label><caption><p>Overall and domain OHIP-EDENT scores by impression material.</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th></th><th></th><th align="center">Alginate</th><th align="center">Silicone</th></tr><tr><th></th><th></th><th align="center"><italic>N</italic> = 78</th><th align="center"><italic>N</italic> = 78</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="4" align="left"><italic>Overall OHIP-EDENT score</italic></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Overall score:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">38.5 (2, 75)</td><td align="char">27.0 (0, 69)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">6</td><td align="char">6</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4" align="left">
</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4" align="left"><italic>Domain OHIP-EDENT score</italic></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Function limitation:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">9.0 (0, 12)</td><td align="char">7.0 (0, 12)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">5</td><td align="char">5</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Pain:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">11.0 (0, 16)</td><td align="char">8.0 (0, 16)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">6</td><td align="char">5</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Psychological discomfort:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">3.0 (0, 8)</td><td align="char">2.0 (0, 8)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">5</td><td align="char">5</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Physical disability:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">7.0 (0, 12)</td><td align="char">5.0 (0, 12)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">6</td><td align="char">6</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Psychological disability:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">2.0 (0, 8)</td><td align="char">2.0 (0, 8)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">5</td><td align="char">6</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Social disability:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">2.0 (0, 12)</td><td align="char">0.0 (0, 11)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">5</td><td align="char">6</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" align="left">Handicap:</td><td align="left">Median (range)</td><td align="char">0.0 (0, 8)</td><td align="char">0.0 (0, 8)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Missing</td><td align="char">5</td><td align="char">6</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></floats-group></pmc></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Pmc/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 003127 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 003127 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Pmc
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= PMC:4119301
|texte= A Randomised Controlled Trial of complete denture impression materials
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:24995473" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |