A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: three year results

Abstracts on this page have been chosen and edited by Dr Trevor Watts

Abstract

The ball-spring attachment needed more repairs, but subjects were satisfied with both methods of retention.

Main

MacEntee MI, Walton JN et al. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93: 28–37

This study compared 34 patients with a mandibular overdenture supported by 2 implants linked with a bar and clip (BC), and 34 with an overdenture supported by separate implants with ball-spring (BS) attachments. Self-reported healthy status was significantly greater in the BC group (38%) than in BS (18%). Each subject paid US$1300 for the treatment, but maintenance was free.

The number of denture adjustments was similar in both groups, as was the time taken for them. However, both the number of repairs and the time taken to do them were significantly greater in the BS group, though the cost of repairs did not differ significantly. There was no difference in satisfaction between the two groups.

The authors note that repairs were commoner in implants which were inclined more than 6° lingually or 6.5° facially in the sagittal plane, and mention the manufacturer's recommendation for paralleling BS implants and the denture insertion path.