Angled ball and locator attachments for immediate loaded inclined implants used to retain maxillary overdentures: A cross over study of patient satisfaction and oral health related quality of life

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this was to compare the influence of two different angulated abutment designs on patient satisfaction, oral health-related quality of life, and pros- thetic aspects of implant-supported maxillary overdentures. Materials and Methods: For this cross-over study, 18 patients with completely edentu- lous maxillary ridges opposing implant-retained mandibular overdentures received 4 implants between the maxillary sinuses using computer-guided surgery. The anterior implants were installed at canine/lateral incisor areas and inclined 15 labially. The pos- terior implants were inserted just anterior to the maxillary sinuses and inclined 15o dis- tally. Eight patients received maxillary overdentures retained by angled ball attachment (ball overdenture [BOD]) and angled locator attachment in random order. After 6 months, patients indicated satisfaction with their prosthesis using a visual analog scale (VAS), and oral health impact profile (OHIP-14). Moreover, postinsertion prosthodontic maintenance and complications were recorded for both attachments. Comparisons of patient satisfaction and prosthetic complications between groups were performed using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test and the McNemar test, respectively. Results: Locator overdenture (LOD) recorded significantly higher scores than the BOD group regarding all the VAS questions except for ease of cleaning (p < 0.007). LOD recorded significantly higher patient satisfaction regarding the pronunciation of sounds (p = 0.009), painful aching (p = 0.018), feeling tense (p = 0.011), unsatisfac- tory diet (p = 0.013), irritability with people (p = 0.005), and life in general (p = 0.004). The most common complications were matrix activation/renewal (n = 34). BOD showed a significantly higher incidence of attachment loosening (p = 0.002), and teeth fracture (p = 0.049) than LOD. LOD showed a significantly higher incidence of attachment wear and replacement than BOD (p <0.001). There was no difference between groups regarding soft tissue complications. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, and in terms of improved patient- centered outcomes, angled locator attachments are recommended to retain maxillary implant overdentures opposed by implant retained mandibular overdentures at it was associated with increased patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life than angled ball attachments. However, locator attachment was associated with more postinsertion prosthodontic maintenance than ball attachment.