Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results.
Identifieur interne : 001633 ( PubMed/Checkpoint ); précédent : 001632; suivant : 001634Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results.
Auteurs : Regina Mericske-Stern [Suisse] ; Dieter Probst ; Fritz Fahrl Nder ; Marc SchellenbergSource :
- Clinical implant dentistry and related research [ 1708-8208 ] ; 2009.
Descripteurs français
- KwdFr :
- Adulte d'âge moyen, Analyse du stress dentaire, Conception de prothèse dentaire, Coûts des soins de santé, Enquêtes et questionnaires, Femelle, Force occlusale, Humains, Implants dentaires, Mandibule, Mâchoire édentée (rééducation et réadaptation), Mâle, Overdenture, Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée, Rétention de prothèse dentaire (instrumentation), Satisfaction du patient, Sujet âgé, Études croisées.
- MESH :
- rééducation et réadaptation : Mâchoire édentée.
- Adulte d'âge moyen, Analyse du stress dentaire, Conception de prothèse dentaire, Coûts des soins de santé, Enquêtes et questionnaires, Femelle, Force occlusale, Humains, Implants dentaires, Mandibule, Mâle, Overdenture, Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée, Rétention de prothèse dentaire, Satisfaction du patient, Sujet âgé, Études croisées.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Aged, Bite Force, Cross-Over Studies, Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis Retention (instrumentation), Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Dental Stress Analysis, Denture, Overlay, Female, Health Care Costs, Humans, Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation), Male, Mandible, Middle Aged, Patient Satisfaction, Surveys and Questionnaires.
- MESH :
- chemical : Dental Implants.
- instrumentation : Dental Prosthesis Retention.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous.
- Aged, Bite Force, Cross-Over Studies, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Dental Stress Analysis, Denture, Overlay, Female, Health Care Costs, Humans, Male, Mandible, Middle Aged, Patient Satisfaction, Surveys and Questionnaires.
Abstract
There is evidence for the superiority of two-implant overdentures over complete dentures in the mandible. Various anchorage devices were used to provide stability to overdentures. The aim of the present study was to compare two designs of a rigid bar connecting two mandibular implants.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00109.x
PubMed: 18783424
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:18783424Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results.</title><author><name sortKey="Mericske Stern, Regina" sort="Mericske Stern, Regina" uniqKey="Mericske Stern R" first="Regina" last="Mericske-Stern">Regina Mericske-Stern</name><affiliation wicri:level="4"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland. regina.mericske@zmk.unibe.ch</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Suisse</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern 3010</wicri:regionArea><placeName><settlement type="city">Berne</settlement><region type="région" nuts="3">Canton de Berne</region><settlement type="city">Berne</settlement></placeName><orgName type="university">Université de Berne</orgName></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Probst, Dieter" sort="Probst, Dieter" uniqKey="Probst D" first="Dieter" last="Probst">Dieter Probst</name></author><author><name sortKey="Fahrl Nder, Fritz" sort="Fahrl Nder, Fritz" uniqKey="Fahrl Nder F" first="Fritz" last="Fahrl Nder">Fritz Fahrl Nder</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schellenberg, Marc" sort="Schellenberg, Marc" uniqKey="Schellenberg M" first="Marc" last="Schellenberg">Marc Schellenberg</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2009">2009</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:18783424</idno><idno type="pmid">18783424</idno><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00109.x</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">001C18</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">001C18</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Curation">001C18</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Curation">001C18</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Checkpoint">001C18</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Checkpoint" wicri:step="PubMed">001C18</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results.</title><author><name sortKey="Mericske Stern, Regina" sort="Mericske Stern, Regina" uniqKey="Mericske Stern R" first="Regina" last="Mericske-Stern">Regina Mericske-Stern</name><affiliation wicri:level="4"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland. regina.mericske@zmk.unibe.ch</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">Suisse</country><wicri:regionArea>Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern 3010</wicri:regionArea><placeName><settlement type="city">Berne</settlement><region type="région" nuts="3">Canton de Berne</region><settlement type="city">Berne</settlement></placeName><orgName type="university">Université de Berne</orgName></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Probst, Dieter" sort="Probst, Dieter" uniqKey="Probst D" first="Dieter" last="Probst">Dieter Probst</name></author><author><name sortKey="Fahrl Nder, Fritz" sort="Fahrl Nder, Fritz" uniqKey="Fahrl Nder F" first="Fritz" last="Fahrl Nder">Fritz Fahrl Nder</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schellenberg, Marc" sort="Schellenberg, Marc" uniqKey="Schellenberg M" first="Marc" last="Schellenberg">Marc Schellenberg</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Clinical implant dentistry and related research</title><idno type="eISSN">1708-8208</idno><imprint><date when="2009" type="published">2009</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Aged</term><term>Bite Force</term><term>Cross-Over Studies</term><term>Dental Implants</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Retention (instrumentation)</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Stress Analysis</term><term>Denture, Overlay</term><term>Female</term><term>Health Care Costs</term><term>Humans</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation)</term><term>Male</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Patient Satisfaction</term><term>Surveys and Questionnaires</term></keywords><keywords scheme="KwdFr" xml:lang="fr"><term>Adulte d'âge moyen</term><term>Analyse du stress dentaire</term><term>Conception de prothèse dentaire</term><term>Coûts des soins de santé</term><term>Enquêtes et questionnaires</term><term>Femelle</term><term>Force occlusale</term><term>Humains</term><term>Implants dentaires</term><term>Mandibule</term><term>Mâchoire édentée (rééducation et réadaptation)</term><term>Mâle</term><term>Overdenture</term><term>Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée</term><term>Rétention de prothèse dentaire (instrumentation)</term><term>Satisfaction du patient</term><term>Sujet âgé</term><term>Études croisées</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implants</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="instrumentation" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Prosthesis Retention</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rehabilitation" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rééducation et réadaptation" xml:lang="fr"><term>Mâchoire édentée</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Aged</term><term>Bite Force</term><term>Cross-Over Studies</term><term>Dental Prosthesis Design</term><term>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</term><term>Dental Stress Analysis</term><term>Denture, Overlay</term><term>Female</term><term>Health Care Costs</term><term>Humans</term><term>Male</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Middle Aged</term><term>Patient Satisfaction</term><term>Surveys and Questionnaires</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="fr"><term>Adulte d'âge moyen</term><term>Analyse du stress dentaire</term><term>Conception de prothèse dentaire</term><term>Coûts des soins de santé</term><term>Enquêtes et questionnaires</term><term>Femelle</term><term>Force occlusale</term><term>Humains</term><term>Implants dentaires</term><term>Mandibule</term><term>Mâle</term><term>Overdenture</term><term>Prothèse dentaire implanto-portée</term><term>Rétention de prothèse dentaire</term><term>Satisfaction du patient</term><term>Sujet âgé</term><term>Études croisées</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">There is evidence for the superiority of two-implant overdentures over complete dentures in the mandible. Various anchorage devices were used to provide stability to overdentures. The aim of the present study was to compare two designs of a rigid bar connecting two mandibular implants.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">18783424</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2009</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>16</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2015</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>19</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print-Electronic"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1708-8208</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet"><Volume>11</Volume><Issue>3</Issue><PubDate><Year>2009</Year><Month>Sep</Month></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Clinical implant dentistry and related research</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Clin Implant Dent Relat Res</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>228-37</MedlinePgn></Pagination><ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00109.x</ELocationID><Abstract><AbstractText Label="BACKGROUND" NlmCategory="BACKGROUND">There is evidence for the superiority of two-implant overdentures over complete dentures in the mandible. Various anchorage devices were used to provide stability to overdentures. The aim of the present study was to compare two designs of a rigid bar connecting two mandibular implants.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="MATERIALS AND METHODS" NlmCategory="METHODS">Completely edentulous patients received a new denture in the maxilla and an implant-supported overdenture in the mandible. They were randomly allocated to two groups (A or B) with regard to the bar design. A standard U-shaped bar (Dolder bar) was used connecting the two implants in a straight line. For comparison, precision attachments were soldered distal to the bar copings. Group A started the study with the standard bar (S-bar), while group B started with the attachment-bar (A-bar). After 3 months, they had to answer a questionnaire (visual analogue scale [VAS]); then the bar design was changed in both groups. After a period of another 3 months, the patients had to answer the same questions; then they had the choice to keep their preferred bar. Now the study period was extended to another year of observation, and the patients answered again the same questionnaire. In vivo force measurements were carried out with both bar types at the end of the test periods. The prosthetic maintenance service carried out during the 6-month period was recorded for both bar types in both groups. Statistical analysis as performed with the SPSS statistical package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="RESULTS" NlmCategory="RESULTS">Satisfaction was high in both groups. Group B, who had entered the study with the attachment bar, gave slightly better ratings to this type for four items, while in group A, no differences were found. At the end of the 6-month comparison period, all but one patient wished to continue to wear the attachment bar. Prosthetic service was equal in groups A and B, but the total number of interventions is significantly higher in the attachment bar. Force patterns of maximum biting were similar in both bar designs, but exhibited significantly higher axial forces in the attachment bar.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="CONCLUSIONS" NlmCategory="CONCLUSIONS">Both bar designs provide good retention and functional comfort. High stability appears to be an important factor for the patients' satisfaction and oral comfort. Rigid retention results in a higher force impact and appears to evoke the need for the retightening of occlusal screws, resulting in more maintenance service.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Mericske-Stern</LastName><ForeName>Regina</ForeName><Initials>R</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland. regina.mericske@zmk.unibe.ch</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Probst</LastName><ForeName>Dieter</ForeName><Initials>D</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Fahrländer</LastName><ForeName>Fritz</ForeName><Initials>F</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Schellenberg</LastName><ForeName>Marc</ForeName><Initials>M</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016449">Randomized Controlled Trial</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList><ArticleDate DateType="Electronic"><Year>2008</Year><Month>09</Month><Day>09</Day></ArticleDate></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>United States</Country><MedlineTA>Clin Implant Dent Relat Res</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>100888977</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>1523-0899</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><ChemicalList><Chemical><RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber><NameOfSubstance UI="D015921">Dental Implants</NameOfSubstance></Chemical></ChemicalList><CitationSubset>D</CitationSubset><CitationSubset>IM</CitationSubset><MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000368" MajorTopicYN="N">Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D001732" MajorTopicYN="N">Bite Force</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D018592" MajorTopicYN="N">Cross-Over Studies</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015921" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Implants</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017267" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Prosthesis Design</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017268" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Prosthesis Retention</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000295" MajorTopicYN="Y">instrumentation</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019094" MajorTopicYN="Y">Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003799" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Stress Analysis</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003828" MajorTopicYN="Y">Denture, Overlay</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005260" MajorTopicYN="N">Female</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017048" MajorTopicYN="N">Health Care Costs</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D007575" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000534" MajorTopicYN="N">rehabilitation</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008334" MajorTopicYN="N">Mandible</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008875" MajorTopicYN="N">Middle Aged</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017060" MajorTopicYN="N">Patient Satisfaction</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D011795" MajorTopicYN="N">Surveys and Questionnaires</DescriptorName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2008</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>12</Day><Hour>9</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2009</Year><Month>11</Month><Day>17</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2008</Year><Month>9</Month><Day>12</Day><Hour>9</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">18783424</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pii">CID109</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="doi">10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00109.x</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></PubmedData></pubmed><affiliations><list><country><li>Suisse</li></country><region><li>Canton de Berne</li></region><settlement><li>Berne</li></settlement><orgName><li>Université de Berne</li></orgName></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Fahrl Nder, Fritz" sort="Fahrl Nder, Fritz" uniqKey="Fahrl Nder F" first="Fritz" last="Fahrl Nder">Fritz Fahrl Nder</name><name sortKey="Probst, Dieter" sort="Probst, Dieter" uniqKey="Probst D" first="Dieter" last="Probst">Dieter Probst</name><name sortKey="Schellenberg, Marc" sort="Schellenberg, Marc" uniqKey="Schellenberg M" first="Marc" last="Schellenberg">Marc Schellenberg</name></noCountry><country name="Suisse"><region name="Canton de Berne"><name sortKey="Mericske Stern, Regina" sort="Mericske Stern, Regina" uniqKey="Mericske Stern R" first="Regina" last="Mericske-Stern">Regina Mericske-Stern</name></region></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001633 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd -nk 001633 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= PubMed
|étape= Checkpoint
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:18783424
|texte= Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:18783424" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |