|
A Survey of the Use of Mandibular Implant Overdentures in 10 Countries
Gunnar E. Carlsson, LDS, Odont Dr/PhD/Mats Kronström, LDS, Odont Dr/PhD/Cees de Baat, DDS, PhD/Marco Cune, DDS, PhD/David Davis, BDS, PhD, FDSRCS (Eng)/Pavlos Garefis, DDS, PhD/Seong Joo Heo, DDS, MS, PhD/Asbjørn Jokstad, DDS, Dr Odont/PhD/Masarou Matsuura, DDS, PhD/Timo Närhi, LDS, Odont Dr/PhD/Richard Ow, BDS, MSc/Argiris Pissiotis, DDS, MSc, PhD/Hironobu Sato, DDS, PhD/George A. Zarb, BChD, DDS, MS, MS, FRCD (Can)
Pages: 211–217 PMID: 15119874
|
|
Purpose:This preliminary international survey compared provision of implant-retained
overdentures to fixed implant-supported prostheses for edentulous mandibles. Materials
and Methods:Questionnaires based on a 2001 Swedish study were sent to prosthodontists
and specialist clinics in nine additional countries. Results:Response rate varied from
53% to 100% in 10 national surveys and should allow careful comparison of results. The
relationship between implant overdentures and fixed implant-supported prostheses in
treatment of edentulous mandibles varied much; in Sweden, the proportion of overdentures
was 12%, whereas it was 93% in the Netherlands. In all countries, the most common
reason for choice of the overdenture was reduced cost. In all but two countries, the
majority of respondents thought that patients with implant overdentures were equally or
more satisfied with overdentures as those with fixed implant-supported prostheses.
Conclusion:There were great differences among the 10 countries in choice of implant
treatment of the edentulous mandible. The relative proportion of mandibular overdentures
to fixed prostheses was low in Sweden and Greece and varied from one to two thirds in
the other countries, except the Netherlands. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:211–217.
|