Does the Use of Surface Electromyography Could Improve Quality of Life among Patients Rehabilitated by Mandibular Overdentures on Different Attachments?

Maria  Fera; Myroslav  Goncharuk-Khomyn; Oleksandr  Fera; Anatoliy  Bokoch; Andrii  Keniuk; Andriy  Kryvanych

Authors

Maria Fera
Myroslav Goncharuk-Khomyn
Oleksandr Fera
Anatoliy Bokoch
Andrii Keniuk
Andriy Kryvanych

Keywords:

Dental Implantation, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Quality of Life

Abstract

Objective: To analyze and compare changes of quality of life parameter among dental patients rehabilitated by the implant-supported overdentures with different attachment systems. Material and Methods: Forty-eight patients were recruited as a study cohort. The implant placement procedure was based on the results obtained by CBCT scanning and individualized surgical templates manufactured for correct implant placement. Each individual received two k3Pro Implants (Sure Type with 4.0 or 4.5 mm in diameter) at the intraforaminal area due to standard protocol of implantation provided by the manufacturer under local anesthesia. All patients were distributed between two groups based on the fact of using either Locator- or ball-attachments. Rank correlation was measured using Spearman correlation coefficient, while linear correlation was evaluated by Pearson correlation coefficient. Results: No statistically meaningful differences were noted regarding patients’ distribution among groups considering age (p>0.05) and gender (p>0.05). Provided patient-level analysis demonstrated that increase of conventional full denture service time was positively correlated with escalation of OHIP-EDENT scores. The most prominent inter-correspondences were noted specifically between longevity of denture service and elevation of scores within “Functional limitation” (r=0.61; p<0.05), “Physical pain” (r=0.51; p<0.05) and “Physical disability” (r=0.57; p<0.05) subdomains. No statistically argumented regressions were noted between increase tendency of OHIP-EDENT scores and gender (p>0.05) or age (p>0.05) parameters. Conclusion: Significant improvements of quality of life measured with OHIP-EDENT were noted for both types of attachments compared to the pre-treatment situation independently of additionally provided surface electromyography-based alignment.

References

Fernandez-Estevan L, Selva-Otaolaurruchi EJ, Montero J, Sola-Ruiz F. Oral health-related quality of life of implant-supported overdentures versus conventional complete prostheses: retrospective study of a cohort of edentulous patients. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2015; 20(4):e450-8. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20498

Kutkut A, Bertoli E, Frazer R, Pinto-Sinai G, Hidalgo RF, Studts J. A systematic review of studies comparing conventional complete denture and implant retained overdenture. J Prosthodont Res 2018; 62(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2017.06.004

Palomares T, Montero J, Rosel EM, Del-Castillo R, Rosales JI. Oral health-related quality of life and masticatory function after conventional prosthetic treatment: A cohort follow-up study. J Prosthet Dent 2018; 119(5):755-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.07.023

Payne AG, Alsabeeha NH, Atieh MA, Esposito M, Ma S, El-Wegoud MA. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: attachment systems for implant overdentures in edentulous jaws. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 10(10):CD008001. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008001.pub2

Al Omoush SA, El Manaseer WR, Al Soleihat F, Jamani KD. Subjective assessment of satisfaction degree and psychosocial status of patients with highly atrophic mandible treated by implant-retained over-denture. Med Leg Update 2021; 21(1):886-92. https://doi.org/10.37506/mlu.v21i1.2429

Borges GA, Barbin T, Dini C, Maia LC, Magno MB, Barão VA, Mesquita MF. Patient-reported outcome measures and clinical assessment of implant-supported overdentures and fixed prostheses in mandibular edentulous patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2020; S0022-3913(20)30694-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.11.005

Grunert I, Kofler M, Gausch K, Kronenberg M. Masseter and temporalis surface electromyography in patients wearing complete dentures comparing anterior and posterior occlusal concepts - a pilot study. J Oral Rehabil 1994; 21(3):337-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1994.tb01148.x

Ranganathan S. A comparative evaluation of patient's satisfaction and quality of life and masticatory efficiency with conventional complete denture, single and double implant retained mandibular overdenture using a surface electromyography-An in vivo study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2020; 20(5):15-6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.306339

de Caxias FP, Túrcio KH, Neto CL, de Athayde FR, Goiato MC, Dos Santos DM. Effects of rehabilitation with complete dentures on bite force and electromyography of jaw and neck muscles and the correlation with occlusal vertical dimension. Clin Oral Investig 2021; 25(7):4691-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03783-1

Vere J, Hall D, Patel R, Wragg P. Prosthodontic maintenance requirements of implant-retained overdentures using the locator attachment system. Int J of Prosthodont 2012; 25(4):392-4.

Miler AM, Correia AR, Rocha JM, Campos JC, da Silva MH. Locator® attachment system for implant overdentures: a systematic review. Stomatologija 2017; 19(4):124-9.

Büttel AE, Bühler NM, Marinello CP. Locator or ball attachment: a guide for clinical decision making. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2009; 119(9):901-18.

Rosa CD, de Souza Leão R, Guerra CM, Pellizzer EP, da Silva Casado BG, de Moraes SL. Do ball-type attachment systems for overdenture result in better patient-satisfaction? A systematic review of randomized crossover clinical trial. Saudi Dent J 2021; 33(6):299-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2021.03.002

Tecco S, Cattoni F, Darvizeh A, Bosco F, Sanci V, Nota A, et al. Evaluation of masticatory muscle function using digital versus traditional techniques for mockup fabrication: a controlled prospective study. Appl Sci 2020; 10(17):6013. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10176013

Possebon AP, Faot F, Machado RM, Nascimento GG, Leite FR. Exploratory and confirmatory factorial analysis of the OHIP-Edent instrument. Braz Oral Res 2018; 32:e111. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0111

Souza RF, Leles CR, Guyatt GH, Pontes CB, Della Vecchia MP, Neves FD. Exploratory factor analysis of the Brazilian OHIP for edentulous subjects. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37(3):202-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.02043.x

Mahanna FF, Elsyad MA, Mourad SI, Abozaed HW. Satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life of different attachments used for implant-retained overdentures in subjects with resorbed mandibles: a crossover trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2020; 35(2):423-31. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.7869

Montero J, Bravo M, Albaladejo A. Validation of two complementary oral-health related quality of life indicators (OIDP and OSS 0-10) in two qualitatively distinct samples of the Spanish population. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008; 6(1):1-4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-6-101

Bortoluzzi MC, Traebert J, Lasta R, Da Rosa TN, Capella DL, Presta AA. Tooth loss, chewing ability and quality of life. Contemp Clin Dent 2012; 3(4):393-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-237X.107424

Leake JL. An index of chewing ability. J Public Health Dent 1990; 50(4):262-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-7325.1990.tb02133.x

Bowers D. Medical Statistics From Scratch: An Introduction for Health Professionals. London: John Wiley & Sons; 2019.

Everitt BS. Medical Statistics From A to Z: A Guide for Clinicians and Medical Students. Cambridge University Press; 2021.

Mukaka MJ. Statistics corner: a guide to appropriate use of correlation in medical research. Malawi Med J 2012; 24(3):69-71.

Goncharuk-Khomyn M, Andrii K. Evaluation of peri-implant bone reduction levels from superimposition perspective: pilot study among Ukrainian implantology practice. Pesqui Bras Odontopediatria Clin Integr 2018; 18(1):3856. https://doi.org/10.4034/PBOCI.2018.181.10

El Osta N, El Osta L, Moukaddem F, Papazian T, Saad R, Hennequin M, Khabbaz LR. Impact of implant-supported prostheses on nutritional status and oral health perception in edentulous patients. Clin Nutr ESPEN 2017; 18:49-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2017.01.001

Elsyad MA, Mahanna FF, Elshahat MA, Elshoukouki AH. Locators versus magnetic attachment effect on peri-implant tissue health of immediate loaded two implants retaining a mandibular overdenture: a 1-year randomised trial. J Oral Rehabil 2016; 43(4):297-305. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.7484

Kucukkurt S, Özturk C. Comparison of the effects of two different types of retainers used in implant-supported overdenture prosthesis on patient satisfaction. Yeditepe Dent J 2020; 16(1):74-80. https://doi.org/10.5505/yeditepe.2020.71676

Chaware SH, Thakkar ST. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the attachments used in implant-supported overdentures. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2020; 20(3):255-268. https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_368_19

Matthys C, Vervaeke S, Besseler J, Doornewaard R, Dierens M, De Bruyn H. Five years follow-up of mandibular 2-implant overdentures on locator or ball abutments: Implant results, patient-related outcome, and prosthetic aftercare. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2019; 21(5):835-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12840

Brandt S, Lauer HC, Fehrenz M, Güth JF, Romanos G, Winter A. Ball versus Locator® attachments: a retrospective study on prosthetic maintenance and effect on oral-health-related quality of life. Materials 2021; 14(4):1051. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14041051

Eren Türk P, Geckili O, Türk Y, Günay V, Bilgin T. In vitro comparison of the retentive properties of ball and locator attachments for implant overdentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29(5):1106-13. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3621

Hassan SS, Helmy MH. Implant supported mandibular overdentures with Locator attachments in patients with resorbed mandibular ridges. A cross over study of patient satisfaction and oral health related quality of life. Egypt Dent J 2020; 66:671-81. https://doi.org/10.21608/EDJ.2020.79139

Abdelhamid AM, Metwally NA, Imam MH. The effect of two different attachments with implant retained mandibular overdentures on the masticatory function. J Dent Health Oral Disord Ther 2016; 4(2):38-45. https://doi.org/10.15406/jdhodt.2016.04.00101

Abdel-Bary SK, Alameldeen HE. Electromyographic evaluation of implant overdenture retained by two different types of attachments (randomized control trial). Egypt Dent J 2019; 65(4):3751-61. https://doi.org/10.21608/EDJ.2019.76021

Elsyad MA, Ibrahim AE, Nawar NH, Belal TM. Electromyographic connectivity of masseter muscle with different retentive attachments for implant overdentures in patients with atrophied mandibular ridges: a crossover study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2019; 34(5):1213-22. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.7484

Sun X, Zhai JJ, Liao J, Teng MH, Tian A, Liang X. Masticatory efficiency and oral health-related quality of life with implant-retained mandibular overdentures. Saudi Med J 2014; 35(10):1195-202.

Awad MA, Rashid F, Feine JS. Overdenture effectiveness study team consortium. The effect of mandibular 2-implant overdentures on oral health-related quality of life: an international multicentre study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25(1):46-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12205