Cost-effectiveness analysis of two attachment systems for mandibular overdenture

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Implant-Supported Single Crown and Tooth-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses in Türkiye

OBJECTIVES

The most cost-effective option for replacing lost teeth is not evident because there is a dearth of evidence-based information on implant-supported single crowns versus tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses. This study conducted the analysis of cost-effectiveness of implant-supported single crown and tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses from a social perspective in Türkiye.

METHODS

Costs were calculated in the analysis from a social perspective for 2021. Costs and quality-adjusted prosthesis year (QAPY) values were computed over a 20-year period in the study using the Markov model. The computed values were discounted by 5%. The results are presented as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. To assess the impact of uncertainty on cost-effectiveness analyses, a tornado diagram and Monte Carlo simulations were created.

RESULTS

Throughout the 20-year time horizon, tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses cost $985.58 cumulatively, whereas implant-supported single crown cost $2161.64 (US $1 = 9.22 ₺ as of 15 October 2021). The calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is 1.333 per QAPY. Compared with the implant-supported single crown tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses, it offers a QAPY of 0.882 over a 20-year period, while costing an additional $1176.06.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the implant-supported single crown provided higher QAPY value but was costlier. When the research's findings are compared with the literature, it becomes clear that Türkiye has lower dental care expenses than most other nations.

Early Loading of Two Implants Supporting Mandibular Overdentures in Geriatric Edentulous Patients: A 12-Year Follow-Up Study

Background: This study aims to show the clinical outcomes of implants supporting mandibular overdentures in edentulous patients. Methods: Mandibular edentulous patients were diagnosed with an oral examination, panoramic radiograph, and diagnostic casts for intermaxillary relations and treated with overdentures over two implants. After two-stage surgery, implants were early loaded with an overdenture at 6 weeks. Results: Fifty-four patients (28 females and 24 males) were treated with 108 implants. Thirty-two patients (59.2%) had a previous history of periodontitis. Twenty-three patients (46%) were smokers. Forty patients (74.1%) suffered from systemic diseases (i.e., diabetes, cardiovascular diseases). The clinical follow-up of the study was 147.8 ± 10.4 months. The clinical outcomes showed a global success of 94.5% of implants. Fifty-four overdentures were placed in the patients over the implants. The mean marginal bone loss was 1.12 ± 0.34 mm. Nineteen patients (35.2%) showed some kind of mechanical prosthodontic complication. Sixteen implants (14.8%) were associated with peri-implantitis. Conclusions: Based on the clinical results obtained, we can determine that the treatment of elderly edentulous patients with mandibular overdentures through the early loading of two placed implants is a successful implant protocol.

Prosthetic Rehabilitation Options in Post-Ablative Maxillomandibular Microvascular Reconstructions

Objective

Surgery remains the mainstay for managing most neoplasms arising in the head and neck area. Removable or fixed prostheses are commonly used for prosthetic rehabilitation of head and neck defects following surgical resection. Some major challenges in prosthetic rehabilitation after maxillomandibular microvascular reconstruction include excessive prosthetic space, soft tissue bulk, and occlusal disharmony in the remaining dentition. This review focuses on the challenges we have experienced in the real clinical scenario while rehabilitating reconstructed maxillomandibular defects and the effective prosthetic treatment options that could be considered in each situation.

Discussion

Digital revolution has changed all arenas of life, and it has created a significant impact on cancer treatment planning and the delivery of quality treatment to the needy. Creating adequate retention while ensuring stability and support for the prosthesis can be challenging with temporary acrylic and cast partial removable dentures. Endosseous dental implants are considered a stable, reliable, and esthetic option for reconstruction with advantages such as increased chewing efficiency, preservation of the remaining bone height and width, and improved quality of life. The FP3 to RP5 (Misch's classification) are some commonly followed prosthetic rehabilitation options after microvascular reconstruction. The prosthetic design should permit the usage of interdental aids that ensure the longevity of prostheses.

Conclusion

Occlusion-driven/prosthetic-driven implant-assisted prostheses are considered a reliable option that ensures stable and functional oral rehabilitation among patients with free fibula flap reconstruction. Multidisciplinary teamwork is mandatory for an optimal outcome that improves patients' quality of life.

Implant-Supported Overdentures: Current Status and Preclinical Testing of a Novel Attachment System

Numerous attachment systems exist for implant-supported overdentures, with each having specific limitations in terms of retention, cost, wear, maintenance and cleanability. A retrospective analysis of patients restored with implant-supported overdentures using bars, telescopic crowns and Locator-type attachments was performed and the patients were interviewed. An in vitro strain gauge study compared telescopic crowns, Locator-type attachments and a novel flexible attachment system employing a shape memory alloy (NiTi) with respect to peri-implant strain development during insertion, loading and removal of an overdenture. A significantly lower number of attachment-related complications was observed in bars as compared to telescopic crowns (p = 0.00007) and Locator-type attachments (p = 0.00000), respectively. Greater overall patient satisfaction was noted in bar-retained restorations while Locator-type attachments led to lower levels of satisfaction regarding prosthesis retention. In vitro, telescopic crowns caused maximum strain development during prosthesis insertion and loading, while during removal this was observed in Locators with white retentive inserts. NiTi attachments caused significantly lower strain development during insertion as compared to telescopic crowns (p = 0.027). During loading, NiTi attachments caused significantly lower strain development than Locators with blue retentive inserts (p = 0.039). During removal, NiTi attachments caused significantly less strain development as compared to Locators with white retentive inserts (p = 0.027). Positional discrepancies between male and female attachment parts affected the retention and reaction force between both components, which may be minimized by using the novel NiTi attachment system. This may be beneficial in terms of component wear and implant loading.

The effect of ball versus locator attachment system on the performance of implant supported overdenture: A systematic review

Objective

This systematic review was aimed to compare ball and locator attachment system on the basis of clinical and biomechanical performance of implant supported overdenture as well as biological and patient related outcomes.

Material and methods

Open and free electronic and manual searches were performed in digital databases including MEDLINE via PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials, and Scopus along with some other reliable sources. From the 667 retrieved records, 11 full-text controlled trials were included in this study. Risk of bias was assessed according to RoB 2.0 except for one RCT (economic evaluation), only assessed by CASP checklist.

Results

From the 11 retrieved studies, total 183 locator and 219 ball attachments were identified in 452 subjects of 30 yrs–95 yrs of age. Studies provided data about prosthodontic complications or maintenance (replacement or the activation of matrix and patrix part, loss of retention, fracture and relining of the prosthesis, fracture of the attachment and the survival probability), oral health impact profile, soft tissue parameters and periodontal complications, marginal bone loss, patient related outcome and cost of the attachment systems. Only 5 studies were assessed at low risk bias, while other 6 at moderate to high risk of bias.

Conclusion

Locator attachment system show lesser complications including loss of retention and lower maintenance appointments, lesser soft tissue, and periodontal complications than the ball attachment. Ball is better in terms of cost effectiveness. In other related outcomes, no significant differences were noted between ball and locator attachment.

Attachment systems for mandibular implant-supported overdentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Although mandibular implant-supported overdentures have been highly recommended as a treatment option, a consensus on the type of attachment systems that can be used to increase implant and prostheses survivability is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare different types of attachments for retention by investigating outcome measures such as implant and prosthesis survival rates and biological and prosthesis complications in participants with a mandibular implant-supported overdenture.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The search was performed in the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus databases by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria and registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021253566). An analysis of association was conducted between different attachment systems and implant and overdenture survival rates in randomized controlled clinical trials.

RESULTS

The initial search indicated 477 studies, of which 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included for analysis. A total of 2154 implants and 737 overdentures were analyzed in the meta-analysis. The main results indicated the failure rate for dental implants to be 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.2) and overdentures 4.2% (95% CI, 1.6 to 10.5), respectively. With regard to different attachment systems, a similar failure rate was identified with bar-type retention (7.7% to 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.1), magnetic retention systems (7.6% to 95% CI, 2.2 to 22.7), and ball-type retention (6.8% to 95% CI, 3.0 to 14.3). No significant difference was found in biological complications for splinted and unsplinted implant overdentures (P=.902). Regarding prosthetic complications, the most favorable groups were LOCATOR attachments followed by telescopic and Conus, bar, and ball attachments. Magnet attachments had higher prosthetic complications (7.4 times) than the other attachments.

CONCLUSIONS

Implants and implant-supported mandibular overdentures showed a high survival rate irrespective of the attachment system used. Splinting implants did not significantly affect the rate of biological complications. Prosthetic complications were most common for magnet and least common for LOCATOR attachments.

Handling Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Budget Impact and Risk Aversion

Methods to handle uncertainty in economic evaluation have gained much attention in the literature, and the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) is the most widely used method to summarise and present uncertainty associated with program costs and effects in cost-effectiveness analysis. Some researchers have emphasised the limitations of the CEAC for informing decision and policy makers, as the CEAC is insensitive to radial shifts of the joint distribution of incremental costs and effects in the North-East and South-West quadrants of the cost-effective plane (CEP). Furthermore, it has been pointed out that the CEAC does not incorporate risk-aversion in valuing uncertain costs and effects. In the present article, we show that the cost-effectiveness affordability curve (CEAFC) captures both dimensions of the joint distribution of incremental costs and effects on the CEP and is, therefore, sensitive to radial shifts of the joint distribution on the CEP. Furthermore, the CEAFC also informs about the budget impact of a new intervention, as it can be used to estimate the joint probability that an intervention is both affordable and cost-effective. Moreover, we show that the cost-effectiveness risk-aversion curve (CERAC) allows the analyst to incorporate different levels of risk-aversion into the analysis and can, therefore, be used to inform decision-makers who are risk-averse. We use data from a published cost-effectiveness model of palbociclib in addition to letrozole versus letrozole alone for the treatment of oestrogen-receptor positive, HER-2 negative, advanced breast cancer to demonstrate the differences between CEAC, CEAFC and CERAC, and show how these can jointly be used to inform decision and policy makers.

What is the evidence on the added value of implant-supported overdentures? A review

Background

Implant‐supported overdentures (IODs) have been reported to increase patients' oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) in comparison with conventional dentures (CDs); however, the conclusiveness of evidence on the clinical effectiveness and value for money of IODs versus CDs remains unclear.

Purpose

To review how the added value of IODs is demonstrated in the literature.

Materials and methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database were searched for randomized control trials, controlled clinical trials, and prospective cohort studies containing evaluations of the economic and health benefits and costs of IODs. Information about the clinical effectiveness, such as magnitude of bite forces or chewing efficacy, OHRQoL, costs, and cost‐effectiveness of IODs, was extracted.

Results

A total of 17 articles were included, reporting 15 economic evaluations: 11 cost‐utility analyses (CUAs), 2 of which were combined with a cost‐effectiveness analysis (CEA), and 2 cost–benefit analyses (CBAs). Seven CUAs used the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) questionnaire while four used satisfaction questionnaires to assess the OHRQoL. One study applied quality‐adjusted prosthesis years (QAPYs) for this purpose. The CBAs expressed both the beneficial outcome and the costs of the IOD in monetary terms. The included studies employed a large variety of economic evaluation methods, which limited cross‐study comparability.

Conclusions

On the basis of existing economic evaluations, IODs have frequently been suggested to be a cost‐efficient treatment alternative to CDs; however, the comparability between the various economic evaluation studies was limited due to the different outcome measures used. In addition, it remains unclear whether the additional health benefits of IODs outweigh the higher costs. This is largely dependent on the decision maker's valuation of oral health outcomes. Future research is encouraged to further elucidate patient willingness to pay for IODs and the societal return on investing in IODs more generally.

A Novel Approach for Converting a Mandibular Complete Denture to a Fixed Interim, Screw-Retained Implant Prostheses: A Case Report

For most of the last century, conventional complete dentures have been the standard of care and the most common treatment for edentulous patients. Technological advancements in fabrication techniques may significantly reduce the number of office visits required to fabricate complete dentures. Immediate occlusal loading with mandibular full arch prostheses has been extensively researched and is now one of the standards of care for edentulous patients. A clinical technique for converting a mandibular immediate complete denture to an interim full arch, screw-retained fixed prosthesis with novel implant restorative components for immediate loading on four implants is described.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of two attachment systems for mandibular overdenture

Objectives

This study analysed the cost‐effectiveness of two different attachments for the 2‐implant overdenture (2IOD) in edentulous mandibles.

Materials and methods

When considering alternative treatments, cost‐effectiveness analysis is an important factor for stakeholders (patient, clinician, social security, insurance company, etc.). A general practice population (n = 116) was treated between 2003 and 2013 with a mandibular 2IOD with 2 different ball/stud attachment systems, one spherical (Group D) and one cylindrical (Group L). Patient well‐being was assessed with OHIP‐14‐Total (OHIP‐14‐T), at intake and annually up to 5 years, to calculate the health effect. Initial and maintenance costs of both treatments were inventoried. The cost‐effectiveness was compared. Annual discount rates of 4% and 1.5% were applied to future costs and health outcomes, following Dutch guidelines. Prices were adjusted to the year 2003. To offset the uncertainty in relevant input parameters, a sensitivity analysis was performed using bootstrap analysis. Significance was set at p < .05.

Results

The health effect was 6.36 (SD 5.32) for Group D and 8.54 (SD 5.63) for Group L. The sum of the discounted costs up to 5 years was EUR 4,210.98 (SD 634.75) for the D and EUR 3,840.62 (SD 302.63) for the Group L (p = .005). The bootstrapping reports that L abutment clearly dominates the D abutment in terms of cost‐effectiveness.

Conclusions

The 2IOD on the L abutment is dominant compared to the 2IOD on D abutment, in a 5‐year perspective.