We assessed the quality of the evidence as very low. There was no evidence of a clear difference in participant‐rated general satisfaction with dentures at six months (MD 0.00, 95% CI ‐8.23 to 8.23 one study, 105 participants). There was no evidence of a clear difference in the OHIP‐EDENT at one month (MD 0.05, 95% CI ‐2.37 to 2.47 two studies, 98 participants). Three studies compared single‐stage impressions with alginate versus two stage‐two step with elastomer (silicone, polysulfide, or polyether) impressions. We assessed the quality of the evidence as low. The study found no clear differences in participant‐reported quality of the denture (comfort) after a two‐week 'confirmation' period, but reported that silicone was better for stability and chewing efficiency. Oral health‐related quality of life measured by the OHIP‐EDENT seemed to be better with silicone (MD 7.20, 95% CI 2.71 to 11.69 144 participants). One study compared two stage–two step final impression with alginate versus silicone elastomer. The study did not measure quality of life or dentures, and found no evidence of a clear difference between interventions in the need for adjustments (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.70). One study (27 participants) compared selective pressure final‐impression technique using wax versus polysulfide elastomeric (rubber) material. The study reported that BPS required fewer adjustments. One study (10 participants) evaluated two stage–two step, Biofunctional Prosthetic system (BPS) using additional silicone elastomer compared to conventional methods, and found no evidence of a clear difference for oral health‐related quality of life, or quality of the dentures (denture satisfaction). Two studies compared the same material and different techniques (one study contributed data to a secondary outcome only) two studies compared the same technique and different materials and four studies compared different materials and techniques. Overall, the quality of the evidence for each comparison and outcome was either low or very low, therefore, results should be interpreted with caution, as future research is likely to change the findings. We judged one study on RPD with 72 randomised participants to be at high risk of bias. We assessed six of the studies to be at high risk of bias, and two to be at low risk of bias. Eight studies involved 485 participants with CD.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |