Do ball-type attachment systems for overdenture result in better patient-satisfaction? A systematic review of randomized crossover clinical trial
Objective: This review is to compare patient-satisfaction with ball-type overdenture attachment systems with others attachment systems. Material and methods: This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018097234) and adheres the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic searches on PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochr...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer
2021-09-01
|
| Series: | Saudi Dental Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1013905221000298 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objective: This review is to compare patient-satisfaction with ball-type overdenture attachment systems with others attachment systems. Material and methods: This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018097234) and adheres the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic searches on PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for published articles were performed before October 2020. The PICO question was: “Do patients with a ball-type overdenture retention system have greater satisfaction, when compared to other attachment systems?” The evaluation of risk of bias was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results: After searching the databases, seven articles were selected out of a total of 2583. A total of 312 implants were placed in 139 patients, with a mean age of 65.9 years. The risk of bias in the included studies varied according to the different domains in a risk of uncertain bias or low bias risk. No difference was found between the ball attachment systems and the others systems, with respect to patient-satisfaction. The meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between the ball systems and another systems (P = 0.11; MD: 10.90; 95% CI: −2.55 to 24.35). Conclusions: Regarding patient general satisfaction, it was not possible to determine differences between the ball system and another types of attachment system for overdenture. The ball-type system was statistically superior only to the magnet system. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1013-9052 |