Swallowing Threshold and Efficiency for Maxillary Implant Assisted Overdenture

September 29, 2024 updated by: Mansoura University

Within-subject Evaluation of Swallowing Threshold and Efficiency for Maxillary Implant Assisted Overdenture with and Without Palatal Coverage.

This study aimed to compare the swallowing threshold and efficiency of conventional maxillary implant overdenture and palatless designs.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

New complete dentures were constructed for each participants using the conventional technique. The dentures were then inserted and adjusted according to a lingualized balanced occlusal scheme. The dentures were duplicated using clear acrylic resin material. Radiopaque gutta percha markers were placed on the labial, buccal, and lingual flanges of the clear resin duplicate at different axial planes to create a radiographic stent.

For each participant, dual scan was performed using cone beam computerized tomography ( i-CAT, Pennsylvania, USA). One scan was taken while the patient wore the radiographic stent, and the other scan was taken for the stent extra orally. These two scans were then superimposed to create an implant plan and construct stereolithographic surgical guides. With the assistance of these stereolithographic surgical guides and submerged surgical technique, 4 dental implants (IS III Active Implant, Neo BioTech) were placed in the canines and premolars regions of the maxillary arch, and 2 dental implants were placed in the canines region of the mandibular arch.

Each participants instructed to take Prophylactic broad spectrum antibiotic (875mg Amoxicillin and Clavulanic acid 125 mg) one hour before the surgery and for 7 days and rinsed their mouth with an antiseptic mouthwash (2% chlorohexidine) for 2 weeks after surgery. Additionally, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (Diclofenac tablet 50 mg) was prescribed to control postoperative pain. One week after the surgery, the dentures were relived and relined with soft liner material (Mucosoft, Parkell, Edgewood. USA) and delivered to the participants. Follow-up visits were scheduled.

After the osseointegration period (3 months for the mandibular arch and 6 months for the maxillary arch), locator attachments (Neo Bio Tech) were screwed to the implants. Each patient received the following types of overdentures:

  1. One mandibular implant-retained overdenture: After reliving the mandibular denture, direct pick-up technique was used to incorporate the attachments housing into the fitting surface of the mandibular denture.
  2. Two designs of MaxIODs:

    • Conventional MaxIOD: After relieving the conventional maxillary denture, direct pick-up technique was used to incorporate the attachments housing into the fitting surface of the conventional maxillary denture.
    • Palateless MaxIOD: The conventional maxillary denture was duplicated and the palatal part was cut out, finished, and polished. The fitting surface was relived and direct pick-up technique was used to incorporate the attachments housing into the fitting surface of the palateless maxillary denture.

The participants were randomly allocated into two equal groups (7 per group). Randomization process was carried out by an independent examiner using a computer program, specifically Microsoft Excel. The first group of 7 participants received conventional MaxIODs. After a period of three months, the TOMASS test was done. Following this, they wore a palatless MaxIODs for an additional 3 months, after which the test was repeated. The second group of 7 patients initially received palatless MaxIODs. After three months of use, the TOMASS test was done. They then received conventional MaxIODs and the test was repeated after an additional three months. This randomization process was implemented in order to minimize the effect of the order of restoration on the measurements of swallowing threshold and efficiency.

Swallowing assessment:

TOMASS test was utilized to assess participants' swallowing abilities. (30) For this study, a commercially available cracker biscuit was used. Participants were instructed to sit on a chair in upright position and to eat the biscuit comfortably and as quickly as possible. They were also asked to say their name out loud as it indicate that they had finished the test. Using a video recorder the procedure was recorded for further analysis.

The recorded videos were then analyzed using the Avidemux 2.6 program to measure the following:

  1. Swallowing threshold, which is the duration of chewing until the first swallow (determined by the moment of laryngeal elevation)
  2. The TOMASS test parameters:

    1. Number of bites: The number of discrete bites taken to finish the cracker
    2. Number of masticatory cycles: As each cyclical mandibular movement up-down
    3. Number of swallows: As each vertical movement of the thyroid cartilage
    4. Total ingestion time: The time taken to complete the ingestion of the cracker from the first bite to the last.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

14

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Mansoura, Egypt, 3551
        • faculty of dentistry, mansoura university Mansoura, Egypt,

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • patient had sufficient bone quantity in the area between the mental foramina, sufficient inter-arch space, normal maxilla-mandibular relation, and have been edentulous for at least one year

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases, parafunctional habits, temporomandibular joint disorders, and a history of head/neck surgery were excluded, as were smoking and those who undergo radiation therapy.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: group I conventional maxillary implant overdenture
Conventional MaxIOD: After relieving the conventional maxillary denture, direct pick-up technique was used to incorporate the attachments housing into the fitting surface of the conventional maxillary denture.
With the assistance of these stereolithographic surgical guides and submerged surgical technique, 4 dental implants (IS III Active Implant, Neo BioTech) were placed in the canines and premolars regions of the maxillary arch, and 2 dental implants were placed in the canines region of the mandibular arch.
Active Comparator: group II palatless maxillary implant overdenture
Palateless MaxIOD: The conventional maxillary denture was duplicated and the palatal part was cut out, finished, and polished. The fitting surface was relived and direct pick-up technique was used to incorporate the attachments housing into the fitting surface of the palateless maxillary denture.
With the assistance of these stereolithographic surgical guides and submerged surgical technique, 4 dental implants (IS III Active Implant, Neo BioTech) were placed in the canines and premolars regions of the maxillary arch, and 2 dental implants were placed in the canines region of the mandibular arch.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
swallowing evaluation
Time Frame: after 3 months of overdenture insertion
TOMASS test was utilized to assess participants' swallowing abilities
after 3 months of overdenture insertion

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Abdallah Mohammed Ibrahim, PhD, Mansoura university, Faculty of dentistry, prosthodontics department

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

July 1, 2023

Primary Completion (Actual)

July 30, 2024

Study Completion (Actual)

August 30, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 29, 2024

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 29, 2024

First Posted (Actual)

October 2, 2024

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

October 2, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 29, 2024

Last Verified

September 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • A0408024RP

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Prosthesis Durability

Clinical Trials on implant overdenture

Subscribe