Implant-Supported Removable Partial Denture Improves the Quality of Life of Patients with Extreme Tooth Loss

Implant-assisted removable partial dentures: Part I. a scoping review of clinical applications

PURPOSE

This scoping review aimed to systematically map research regarding implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs), and identify existing gaps in knowledge.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently conducted a search of the MEDLINE-PubMed and Scopus databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Review and included articles published in English up to August 31, 2022, including human studies, reviews, and in vitro studies. Expert opinions, animal studies, and clinical studies involving complete overdentures were excluded, and ten aspects for establishing the treatment strategy for IARPDs were examined.

RESULTS

One hundred and twelve articles were chosen. There were two treatment modalities: IARPDs retained by implant- and tooth-supported surveyed single crowns (SCs) or fixed partial dentures (FPDs). In IARPDs retained by tooth-supported surveyed SCs or FPDs, the survival rate of dental implants for IARPDs was relatively higher with a wide range of marginal bone loss and many complications, but with improved functional performance, oral health-related quality of life, and patient satisfaction. There were limited data on survival or success rates and designs of IARPDs, attachment selections, length and diameter, inclination, placement sites, and loading protocols of implants, regardless of prosthetic types. There was limited information on maxillary IARPDs except for survival rates of implants.

CONCLUSIONS

Although IARPDs could become a useful treatment strategy, there is limited scientific consensus with gaps in knowledge about their use. Additional well-designed clinical and in vitro studies are necessary to scientifically establish IARPDs as definitive prostheses in implant dentistry.

Residual dentition, prosthesis type and oral health-related quality of life in Uruguayan adults

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association between different types of dental prostheses (and residual dentition) and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL).

METHODS

A population-based study with a representative sample of adults and older adults in Uruguay (2010-2011). The dependent variable was the score on the oral impact on daily performance (OIDP), and the main predictor was the pattern of tooth loss and prosthesis use. Covariates included sex, age, socioeconomic status, education, missing teeth, pain and decayed teeth. Negative binomial regression was used.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 762 participants. Those participants not wearing a prosthesis and with extensive tooth loss had a mean OIDP of 3.1 (95% CI = 1.6-6.2), while those wearing removable partial dentures (RPD) and having <12 missing teeth had a mean OIDP of 3.6 (95% CI = 1.3-10.0). Participants with a free-end saddle had the highest mean OIDP, at 4.9 (95% CI = 2.0-12.1). For participants with ≤12 missing teeth, any additional missing tooth was associated with an 11% higher OIDP score. Participants who wore RDPs reported fewer impacts on OHRQoL if they had extensive tooth loss or anterior tooth loss than those with a free-end saddle, or who had lost fewer teeth.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of RPDs is associated with better OHRQoL. These findings may be valuable in clinical practice and prosthetic planning.

Converting Bilateral Free-End Removable Partial Dentures to Implant-Assisted Removable Partial Dentures Using 6 mm Short Implants: Patient-Reported Outcomes of a Prospective Clinical Study

The study assessed oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients who received two 6 mm short implants in mandibular molar sites, converting existing bilateral free-end removable partial dentures (RPDs) to implant-assisted RPDs (IARPDs). After a postsurgical healing period of 4 months, the participants received a non-retentive dome abutment for 8 weeks, and then a retentive ball abutment for another 8 weeks. Afterwards, the participants made their final choice on which abutment to keep. The final follow-up was 1 year after implant placement. OHRQoL was evaluated with the 49-items version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49) at the abutment exchanges and the final follow-up. Furthermore, numerical rating scales were used to analyze patient satisfaction after 1 year. Questionnaire data of 13 participants were evaluated. Overall, OHRQoL increased with both the dome (p = 0.02) and the ball abutments (p < 0.001), without a significant difference between the abutments (p = 0.953). The questionnaires revealed an improvement in terms of oral situation, quality of life, and masticatory capacity (all p < 0.01). Patients showed a significant preference for the ball abutments (p < 0.001). Converting RPDs to IARPDs resulted in significant improvement of OHRQoL. Patients seem to prefer retentive over non-retentive abutments, although no differences in terms of OHRQoL were observed.

Implant-supported removable partial dentures compared to conventional dentures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of quality of life, patient satisfaction, and biomechanical complications

Objectives

The purpose of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to compare implant‐supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs) with distal extension removable partial dentures (DERPDs) in terms of patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs: patients' quality of life and satisfaction) and to determine mechanical and biological complications associated with ISRPDs.

Material and Methods

An electronic search was performed on four databases to identify studies treating Kennedy class I or II edentulous patients and which compared ISRPDs with DERPDs in terms of PROMS and studies, which evaluated mechanical and biological complications associated ISRPDs. Two authors independently extracted data on quality of life, patient satisfaction, and biomechanical complications from these studies. The risk of bias was assessed for each study, and for PROMs, the authors performed a meta‐analysis by using a random‐effects model.

Results

Thirteen articles were included based on the selection criteria. The difference in mean scores for quality of life (30.5 ± 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.9–36.1) and patient satisfaction (−20.8 ± 0.2; 95% CI, −23.7 to −17.8) between treatments with conventional and implant‐supported removable dentures was statistically significant (p < .05). Implant‐supported removable dentures improved patients' overall quality of life and satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications, such as clasp adjustment, abutment or implant loosening, marginal bone resorption, and peri‐implant mucositis, were noted in ISRPDs during patient follow‐up. Studies assessing PROMs were very heterogeneous (I² = 65%, p = .85; I² = 75%, p = .88).

Conclusions

ISRPDs significantly improved quality of life and patient satisfaction. Some mechanical and biological complications have been associated with ISRPDs treatment, requiring regular monitoring of patients to avoid the occurrence of these complications.

Treatment outcomes of implant-assisted removable partial denture with distal extension based on the Kennedy classification and attachment type: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) have recently become popular, but little information is available on the treatment outcomes based on the Kennedy classification and attachment types.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to evaluate the treatment outcomes of IARPD delivered for distal extension edentulous areas based on the differences in the Kennedy classification and attachment type.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

English-language clinical studies on IARPD published between January 1980 and February 2020 were collected from MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Library (via the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Scopus online database, and manual searching. Two reviewers selected the articles based on pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria, followed by data extraction and analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies were selected after evaluating the titles and abstracts of 2410 papers. Nineteen studies were finally included after the perusal of the full text. Fourteen studies focused on Class I, 4 studies investigated both Class I and II, and only 1 study was conducted on Kennedy's class II. Eight types of attachments were reported. The ball attachment was the most frequently used attachment, which was employed in 8 of the included studies. The implant survival rate ranged from 91 to 100%. The reported marginal bone loss ranged from 0.3 mm to 2.30 mm. The patient satisfaction was higher with IARPD than with conventional RPDs or that before treatment. The results of prosthetic complications were heterogeneous and inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

IARPD exhibited favorable clinical outcomes when used as a replacement for distal extension edentulous areas. The comparison between the clinical outcomes of Kennedy's class I and II was inconclusive owing to the lack of studies focusing on Kennedy Class II alone. The stud attachment was the most commonly used type in IARPDs. Overall, the different attachment systems did not influence the implant survival rate and patient satisfaction. Further high-quality studies are needed to investigate the attachment systems used in IARPD.

Are implant-supported removable partial dentures a suitable treatment for partially edentulous patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

A consensus on the clinical performance of implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs) is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical performance of ISRPDs in terms of the implant survival rates, marginal bone loss, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Four electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were independently searched by 2 reviewers for articles published up to December 2020. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the implant survival rates and marginal bone loss by using the R program. The Cochrane collaboration tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-RCT studies.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included, with a total of 334 participants and a mean age of 58 years. The participants received a total of 581 dental implants, 475 conventional and 106 mini-implants. All included studies reported implant survival rate above 90% (range: 92% to 100%). Meta-analysis indicated a high proportion of implant survival rates of 3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2% to 5%) and a low mean raw score of marginal bone loss 0.98 mm (CI: 0.61 to 1.36 mm). Compared with conventional RPDs, improved patient quality of life and satisfaction were reported by studies that evaluated ISRPDs. RCT studies exhibited a low risk of bias for most domains, while most non-RCT studies were classified as good quality.

CONCLUSIONS

ISRPDs exhibited high implant survival rates and acceptable bone loss with improvement in the quality of life and satisfaction of patients when compared with conventional RPDs. Therefore, they can be considered suitable for the rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients.

Effect of the attachments on clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension implant-supported removable partial dentures: A systematic review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Healing abutments and attachments have been used for implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPDs). However, the effects of these abutments and attachments on the clinical outcomes of the implants and prostheses are elusive because of the lack of standardized research protocols.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs with healing abutments and attachments by analyzing qualified studies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic and manual literature search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases including articles published in English from 1980 to 2020. Publications of clinical outcome studies on the mandibular distal extension ISRPDs with healing abutments or attachments were screened by inclusion and exclusion criteria. Clinical outcomes of removable partial dentures (RPDs) and ISRPDs with different types of abutments or attachments were compared by using patient-reported outcome measures, implant survival rate, masticatory performance, and implant- or prosthesis-related complications. Study designs and clinical outcome data were extracted and analyzed. The evidence of the selected studies and degree of recommendation were made according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, and the risk of bias of the studies was assessed based on Newcastle-Ottawa criteria.

RESULTS

Of 541 articles initially identified after removing duplicate records, 11 articles were selected by applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, by inter-viewer agreement, and by hand searching. Nine prospective cohort studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, and 1 randomized controlled trial were included with evidence levels assessed at 1b, 2b, and 2c. The risk of bias varied from 5 to 8 out of 9. Patient overall satisfaction, oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) scores, and masticatory ability were significantly improved for ISRPDs with either healing abutments, ball, or LOCATOR attachments when compared with RPDs. The implant survival rate varied from 92% to 97% at 2 to 10 years for ball attachment and was 100% at 1 year for LOCATOR attachment-supported ISRPDs. Marginal bone loss (MBL) varied from 0 to 1 mm in all studies, although LOCATOR attachments had significantly less MBL compared with ball attachments. The maximal pocket depth and bleeding on probing index around implants at 1 year were 1.7 to 1.8 mm and 0.1 to 0.3. Loose healing caps were the main mechanical complication of implants. There were more prosthetic complications in ISRPDs with ball attachments than RPDs at 10-year follow-up, including gold matrix loosening, loss of retention, and denture base fractures. No direct comparisons were made of patient-reported outcomes or prosthetic complications between ball and LOCATOR attachment-supported ISRPDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Healing abutments and attachments (ball or LOCATOR) improved patient-reported outcomes and the masticatory function of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs. However, insufficient evidence was found to determine the relative effectiveness of different attachment systems on the clinical outcomes of mandibular distal extension ISRPDs. Abutment loosening was the most frequent mechanical complication for healing abutments. More prosthetic complications were associated with ball attachment-supported ISRPDs than RPDs. The major weaknesses of this systematic review were the relatively moderate level of evidence and the publication language, since implant attachments are used in many non-English speaking countries.

Patient-reported outcomes of implant-assisted removable partial dentures with magnetic attachments using short implants: A prospective study

PURPOSE

Implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) with short implants improve the oral functions of removable partial dentures (RPDs). This study aimed to compare the patient-reported outcomes of RPDs and IARPDs with short implants retained by magnetic attachments.

METHODS

We recruited 30 participants with mandibular Kennedy Class I or II and distal extension defects of three or more teeth. RPDs, IARPDs with a healing cap, and IARPDs with a magnetic attachment were evaluated across stages using patient-reported outcomes. All participants completed questionnaires (oral health-related quality of life [OHRQoL], patient general satisfaction, and patient's denture assessment [PDA]) at each stage. The OHRQoL was evaluated using the Oral Health Impact Profile-J 54 (OHIP-J 54) score. The general patient satisfaction was evaluated using a 100 mm visual analog scale. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bonferroni correction were used to evaluate differences between the groups (α=0.05).

RESULTS

The OHRQoL of IARPDs was significantly higher than that of RPDs. IARPDs with a magnetic attachment had significantly better patient general satisfaction and PDA than IARPDs with a healing cap.

CONCLUSIONS

The OHRQoL, patient general satisfaction, and PDA were improved by IARPD with a short implant using a magnetic attachment.

Attachment-retained removable prostheses: Patient satisfaction and quality of life assessment

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Studies on the impact of incorporating attachments in removable prostheses on patient-based outcomes are scarce.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical study was to investigate oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and patient satisfaction in partially edentulous participants before and after rehabilitation with mandibular attachment-retained removable prostheses as compared with conventional removable prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This crossover study included 74 participants (aged 36 to 57). Initially, 56 received conventional clasp-retained removable dental prostheses (RDPs), and 18 received conventional overdentures (ODs) based on their mandibular partially edentulous state. Two months later, of the 56 RDP participants, 24 had received extracoronal attachment-retained RDPs, 17 received telescope-retained RDPs, and 15 received bar-attachment retained RDPs. The 18 OD participants received ball attachment-retained ODs. Assessments included Oral Health Impact Profile-short version-14 for OHRQoL and a visual analog scale (VAS) for patient satisfaction. Assessments were done before treatment and 2 months after wearing each prosthesis with a 1-month washout period. Statistical analysis included the Friedman then the Wilcoxon signed rank test for Oral Health Impact Profile-short version-14 scores and repeated measures ANOVA then the Bonferroni or paired t test for VAS scores (α=.05).

RESULTS

There were no dropouts. Rehabilitation, irrespective of prosthesis type, significantly improved OHRQoL in all domains and significantly increased overall patient satisfaction (P<.05). When compared with the conventional prostheses, attachment-retained prostheses significantly improved functional limitation, psychological discomfort, and physical limitation domains in all groups (P<.05), as well as the physical pain domain in the OD group (P=.041). General satisfaction, stability, comfort, ability to speak, and ability to masticate significantly increased (P<.05) with attachment-retained prostheses. Conventional prostheses were significantly easier to clean (P<.05) in all groups, except for the telescope-attachment group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both conventional and attachment-retained prostheses significantly increased patient satisfaction and improved OHRQoL in all domains as compared with before treatment. However, incorporation of attachments further improved functional limitation, psychological discomfort, and physical limitation domains in all groups, as well as the physical pain domain in the OD group. Participants were more satisfied with their attachment-retained prostheses in most aspects.

Functional oral health-related quality of life impact: A systematic review in populations with tooth loss

Patients perceive the impact of oral disorder in four major areas, the dimensions of oral health-related quality life (OHRQoL) Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. The functional aspect is essential given the need of chewing, biting, speech and swallowing. The objective of this study was to identify OHRQoL information for dental subjects with functional oral health problems. In a systematic review, distinct and clinically relevant groups of dental subject samples, in this study called "population groups," with such functional OHRQoL information based on the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) were identified (PROSPERO registration: CRD42017064033). The search strategy was "Oral Health Impact Profile" or OHIP. Searches were conducted in the PubMed interface of the Medline database, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsyINFO on 8 June 2017 and updated on 14 January 2019. Published OHIP domain data of different versions were recalculated into OHIP-14`s Physical Disability domain score, characterising the subject's Oral Function impact. 3,653 potentially abstracts were screened. We identified 78 publications reporting dimensional information on 154 subject samples with 52 populations. A typical mean functional impact for partially dentate subjects was 1.6 units on a 0 to 8 unit metric, while for edentate subjects, the mean functional impact was 2.6 units. The functional impact score ranged from 0 to 7.9 units with 50% of the patient samples located between 0.8 and 2.6 units. For the first time, we provide normalised and therefore comparable metric information about the functional OHRQoL impact for a substantial number of functional oral conditions.

Mechanical behavior of implant assisted removable partial denture for Kennedy class II

Background

This study evaluated the mechanical response of a removable partial denture (RPD) in Kennedy Class II according to being associated or not with implants.

Material and Methods

Four RPDs were manufactured for a Kennedy Class II: CRPD - Conventional RPD, RPD+1M, RPD+2M and RPD+12M, respectively, signifying implant assisted RPDs with the implant installed in the first molar, second molar, and in the first and second molars. The finite element method was used to determine the most damaged support tooth under compressive load (300N, 10s) and strain gauge analysis was used to evaluate the microstrain. All groups were submitted to a retentive force analysis (0.5 mm/mm, 100kgf). Microstrain and retentive force data were submitted to One-way ANOVA and the Tukey test, all with α=5%.

Results

High microstrain was observed in the second premolar adjacent to the edentulous space under compression load (p< 0.01). RPD+12M presented lower microstrain, however being similar to RPD+2M. RPD+1M presented a higher mean value of retentive force, but similar to RPD+12M. FEM showed RPD assisted by implants concentrates less stress in the periodontal ligament. The association of two implants was sufficient to decrease the stress generated in the implants. The most stressed region for the o-ring abutment was the threads, and the group with two implants showed the lowest stress concentration.

Conclusions

In cases of Kennedy Class II, the association of RPD with implants in the molar region is a favorable option for patient rehabilitation, reducing the movement of the direct retainer adjacent to the edentulous space, increasing the removal force and decreasing the stress magnitude in the periodontal ligament. Key words:Removable partial denture, Finite element analysis, Prosthetic dentistry, Implant-assisted RPD, Distal extension RPD considerations.

Mandibular movements in older people with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the mandibular movements in older people with and without temporomandibular disorder (TMD) associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

STUDY DESIGN

Thirty partially or completely edentulous older adults (65.33 ± 4.7 years) were assigned to 2 groups: (1) with RA and TMD and (2) without RA and TMD. Chewing movements of the jaws during mastication of the test material (Optocal) and the range of mandibular movements were evaluated by using the JT-3-D kinesiographic device before and after new removable prosthesis insertion. Multiple comparisons were made with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey-Kramer test.

RESULTS

Comparisons between the 2 groups before and after new prosthesis insertion revealed that the RA and TMD group had reduced opening angles (P < .05) during chewing. After insertion of new prostheses, both groups showed increased opening and closing angles during chewing (P < .05). The mandibular range of motion results showed that patients with RA and TMD exhibited lower aperture and laterality movements (P < .05) compared with controls before and after new prosthesis insertion. However, there was an increase in aperture, lefty laterality, and protrusion values after new prosthesis insertion in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TMD associated with RA may impair mandibular movements. Well-fitted prostheses may improve mandibular movements in older adults, especially those with RA.

Influence of a removable prosthesis on oral health-related quality of life and mastication in elders with Parkinson disease

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Parkinson disease (PD) symptoms, such as muscle rigidity, tremors in the lips and tongue, and involuntary mandibular movements, may cause oral health-related problems, mastication difficulties, and denture discomfort because of the difficulty in controlling a prosthesis with the oral musculature.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this observational clinical study was to evaluate the influence of oral rehabilitation with a removable prosthesis on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and masticatory efficiency (ME) in elders with PD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-four elders with PD (n=17, mean age 69.4 ±4.7 years) or without PD (n=17, mean age 70.7 ±4.7 years) were recruited. All participants first underwent OHRQoL and ME evaluations. Two months after the insertion of new removable prostheses, the participants were reassessed. The OHRQoL was measured with the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49). ME was evaluated by determining the percentage weight of the comminuted silicone-based artificial material that passed through a 2.8 mm sieve. For each group, data were compared between baseline and after insertion of new removable prostheses by paired t test or Wilcoxon sign test/signed-rank test. Group differences were assessed at each time point by t test (α=.05).

RESULTS

After the insertion of removable prostheses, elders with PD showed improved OHRQoL and ME. Controls also showed improvements on both measures after insertion of removable prostheses. At baseline, elders with PD had lower OHRQoL and ME compared with the controls (P<.05). After removable prosthesis insertion, the elders with PD continued to show lower ME values than the controls, but their OHRQoL was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral rehabilitation with new removable dental prostheses improved the OHRQoL and ME in elders with and without PD, although ME did not reach control levels in elders with PD.

The role of IL-1 gene polymorphisms (IL1A, IL1B, and IL1RN) as a risk factor in unsuccessful implants retaining overdentures

PURPOSE

Implant-supported overdentures are an alternative predictable rehabilitation method that has a high impact on improving the patient's quality of life. However, some biological complications may interfere with the maintenance and survival of these overdenture implants. The goal of this article was to assess the factors that affect peri-implant success, through a hypothetical prediction model for biological complications of implant overdentures.

METHODS

A retrospective observational, prevalence study was conducted in 58 edentulous Caucasian patients rehabilitated with implant overdentures. A total of 229 implants were included in the study. Anamnestic, clinical, and implant-related parameters were collected and recorded in a single database. "Patient" was chosen as the unit of analysis, and a complete screening protocol was established. The data analytical study included assessing the odds ratio, concerning the presence or absence of a particular risk factor, by using binary logistic regression modeling. Probability values (p values) inferior to 0.05 were considered as representing statistically significant evidence.

RESULTS

The performed prediction model included the following variables: mean probing depth, metal exposure, IL1B_allele2, maxillary edentulousness, and Fusobacterium nucleatum. The F. nucleatum showed significant association with the outcome. Introducing a negative coefficient appeared to prevent complications or even boost the biological defense when associated with other factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The prediction model developed in this study could serve as a basis for further improved models that would assist clinicians in the daily diagnosis and treatment planning practice of oral rehabilitation with implant overdentures.

Cost-effectiveness of implant-supported mandibular removable partial dentures

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing conventional removable partial dentures (RPDs) and implant-supported RPDs (ISRPDs) treatment in patients with an edentulous maxilla and a bilateral free-ending situation in the mandible.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty subjects were included. A new RPD was made and implant support was provided 3 months later. Treatment costs (opportunity costs and costs based on tariffs) were calculated. Treatment effect was expressed by means of the Dutch Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire (OHIP-NL49), a chewing ability test (Mixing Ability Index, MAI) and a short-form health survey measuring perceived general health (SF-36), which was subsequently converted into quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was the primary outcome measure of cost-effectiveness, comparing both treatment strategies.

RESULTS

The mean total opportunity costs were €981 (95% CI €971-€991) for the RPD treatment and €2.480 (95% CI €2.461-€2.500) for the ISRPD treatment. The total costs derived from the national tariff structure were €850 for the RPD treatment and €2.610 for the ISRPD treatment. The ICER for OHIP-NL49 and MAI using the opportunity costs was €80 and €786, respectively. When using the tariff structure, corresponding ICERs were €94 and €921. The effect of supporting an RPD with implants when expressed in QALYs was negligible; hence an ICER was not determined.

CONCLUSIONS

It is concluded that depending on the choice of outcome measure and monetary threshold, supporting an RPD with implants is cost-effective when payers are willing to pay more than €80 per OHIP point gained. Per MAI point gained, an additional €786 has to be invested.