Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine the improvement in masticatory performance and satisfaction with chewing ability in partially edentulous patients after treatment with an implant‐supported fixed partial prosthesis (ISFPP). Material and methods This prospective study included 30 patients (mean age 59 years; 17 women) with unilateral posterior missing teeth treated with one‐, two‐ or three‐unit ISFPPs and 10 healthy individuals (mean age 36 years; 8 women) with complete natural dentition to establish the normal levels of mastication. Three variables were determined at baseline and at 3‐months’ follow‐up in all participants: masticatory performance according to the median particle size (MPS) during freestyle mastication and unilateral mastication on each side, and satisfaction with chewing ability using a visual analog scale. Paired samples t test and Kruskal–Wallis test were used for intra‐group and inter‐group comparisons. Results The MPS following freestyle mastication decreased significantly at 3 months in both groups. Significant reductions of 21%, 30%, and 42% in the MPS were obtained from unilateral mastication on the treated side after treatment with 1, 2, or 3 restorative units, respectively. Three months after ISFPP, satisfaction with chewing ability improved by 40% in the treatment group. Conclusions Freestyle masticatory performance may improve slightly within three months of treatment with an ISFPP and may be similar to that of subjects with complete natural dentition. Patients may obtain a 21%–38% improvement in unilateral mastication on the treated side and a 26%–54% improvement in satisfaction with chewing ability.

Purpose To determine the reliability of T‐scan and 3D intraoral scan techniques for assessing the occlusal contact area (OCA), compared to occlusal registration and also to assess the validity of the techniques. Materials and Methods Thirty‐one dentate adults participated in this cross‐sectional study. T‐scan records were used to measure the OCA at maximum bite force and at 50% of maximum force using the software's bite force selection tool. A second method measured the OCA between 2 virtual models scanned intraorally using a 3D surface scan and considering the occlusal contact at 2 interocclusal distances (0‐100 and 0‐200 µm). The third method measured OCA using occlusal registration at moderate and maximum occlusal force, and considering contact at the 2 interocclusal distances (0‐100 and 0‐200 µm). Images obtained using the 3 methods were analyzed using ImageJ software. Test‐retest reliability was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and validity by Pearson correlations. Results ICCs ranged from 0.56 to 0.79 (p < 0.001) for the T‐scan; 0.37 to 0.61 (p < 0.05) for 3D surface scan; and 0.92 to 0.95 (p < 0.0005) for occlusal registration. The highest OCA values were obtained using the T‐scan, and the lowest using the 3D surface scan. Occlusal registration measurements had the highest correlations with those of the other techniques. Conclusions T‐scan is a reliable method for measuring the OCA, but the 3D surface scan is not. Occlusal registration showed a high validity.

Optozeta seems to have good construct validity and appears to be more reliable than Optosil as a test food to assess masticatory function.