In a within-subject cross-over clinical trial, psychometric and functional measurements were taken while 15 completely edentulous subjects wore mandibular fixed prostheses and long-bar removable implant-supported prostheses. In this paper, the results of a psychometric assessment are presented. Eight subjects first received the fixed bridge and seven the removable type. After having worn a prosthesis for a minimum of two months, subjects responded to psychometric scales that measured their perceptions of various factors associated with prostheses. They also chewed test foods while masticatory activity was recorded. The prostheses were then changed and the procedures repeated. At the end of the study, patients were asked to choose the prosthesis that they wished to keep. Patients assigned significantly higher scores, on visual analogue scales, to both types of implant-supported prostheses than to their original conventional prostheses for all factors tested, including general satisfaction. However, no statistically significant differences between the two implant-supported prostheses were detected except for the difficulty of chewing carrot, apple, and sausage. For these foods, the fixed prostheses were rated higher. Subjects' responses to category scales were consistent with their responses to the visual analogue scales. These results suggest that, although patients find the fixed bridge to be significantly better for chewing harder foods, there is no difference in their general satisfaction with the two types of prostheses.

Although previous studies have demonstrated that implant-supported prostheses are more satisfactory and efficient for edentulous patients than are conventional prostheses, until now no investigation has directly compared different types of implant-supported prostheses. We carried out a within-subject cross-over clinical trial with fixed and long-bar removable implant-supported mandibular prostheses. Fifteen subjects were randomly divided into two groups. One group received the fixed prosthesis first, while the other first received the removable. After a two-month adaptation period, psychometric measurements of various aspects of the prostheses and physiological tests of masticatory efficiency were carried out. The prostheses were then changed, and the procedures repeated. At the end of the study, subjects chose the prosthesis they wished to keep. In this paper, we report on the data gathered at this last appointment. Eight subjects chose the fixed (F group), and seven chose the removable (R group). Both groups rated stability and ability to chew with the fixed as significantly better than with the removable. However, the R group rated ease of cleaning as the most important factor governing their decision, followed by esthetics and stability. The F group considered stability to be the most important factor in their decision, followed by chewing ability and ability to clean. There was a tendency for the removable to be chosen by older subjects (+50 years). These results suggest that patients choose fixed or removable implant-supported prostheses for specific reasons, and that patient attitudes should be considered when the design of a prosthesis is being planned for an individual patient.

Although it has been shown that patients are more satisfied with prostheses supported by implants than with conventional dentures, there have been few direct comparisons of the various designs of implant-supported prostheses. This within-subject crossover clinical trial was designed to compare two forms of removable prostheses which are frequently prescribed for the edentulous mandible: a long-bar overdenture supported by 4 implants and a two-implant hybrid overdenture. Sixteen completely edentulous subjects were given a new maxillary conventional denture: Ten of them received the mandibular long-bar prosthesis first and six the hybrid. After a two-month adaptation period, psychometric measures of various aspects of the prostheses and physiological tests of masticatory efficiency were carried out over three weeks. The mandibular prostheses were then changed and the procedures repeated. At the end of the study, subjects were asked to choose the mandibular prosthesis that they wished to keep, and final psychometric measures were taken. In this paper, the results of the psychometric assessment and patient preference are presented. Subjects assessed factors such as general satisfaction, quality of life, stability, retention, comfort, esthetics, ease of cleaning, speaking, and chewing, and how well-chewed foods were before being swallowed. Most of the factors except ease of cleaning and speaking were rated significantly better with long-bar overdentures than with hybrid ones. These results are consistent with the fact that all subjects chose long-bar overdentures, reporting stability, ease of chewing, and comfort as the most important factors influencing their choice. These results suggest that, although subjects assign high ratings for most factors to hybrid overdentures, they find long-bar overdentures to be significantly more stable, comfortable, and easier for chewing.

Sixteen edentulous subjects participated in a within-subject crossover clinical trial to test the hypotheses that a long-bar overdenture attached to 4 implants gives greater patient satisfaction and masticatory efficiency than a two-implant hybrid overdenture. All subjects were given a new maxillary conventional denture. Ten received mandibular long-bar overdentures first and six the hybrid overdentures. Two months later, psychometric assessments and functional tests were repeated 3 times at one-week intervals. The mandibular prosthesis was then changed, and recordings were repeated after another 2 months. Mandibular movements and electromyographic activity of jaw muscles were recorded while subjects chewed standard-sized pieces of 5 foods: bread, cheese, apple, sausage, and carrot. Measurements included masticatory time, cleaning time (the time between the end of mastication and the last swallow), and duration and amplitude of masticatory cycles and phases. Multilevel analyses were performed. No significant differences in masticatory time were found between prostheses for any test food. However, cleaning time for carrot [estimated mean of difference (delta) +/- SE: 1.6 sec +/- 0.7] and bread (delta = 1.0 sec +/- 0.4) was slightly but significantly longer for subjects wearing long-bar overdentures. Cycle duration was longer with the long-bar overdenture only for subjects chewing carrot. The opening phase was shorter and the closing phase longer with the long-bar overdenture for almost all test foods. Vertical amplitude was significantly less with the long-bar overdenture for cheese (delta = -2.6 mm +/- 1.1), apple (delta = -2.6 mm +/- 1.0), and sausage (delta = -2.9 mm +/- 1.3). These results suggest that mastication with the 2 prostheses is equally efficient, although clearance of some foods from the mouth is longer with the long-bar overdentures. They also indicate that patients adapt their masticatory movements to the characteristics of different prostheses.