Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Study protocol

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the single-implant mandibular overdenture versus conventional complete denture: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Túlio Eduardo Nogueira, Shahrokh Esfandiari, Cláudio Rodrigues Leles

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Preliminary clinical studies on the single-implant mandibular overdenture (SIMO) have reported favorable results as an alternative to the conventional complete dentures for rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes were assessed but no evidence is available with respect to the cost-effectiveness of this treatment, which is particularly important to test whether the incremental cost associated with the implant treatment is justified facing the benefits from the intervention. Thus, the aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of single-implant mandibular overdentures.

Methods/design

This randomized clinical trial will include edentulous individuals who meet eligibility criteria. Participants will be randomized into one of the treatment groups: a conventional complete denture group or a single-implant mandibular overdenture group. Direct costs related to therapies in both groups will be identified, measured and valuated for 1 year after treatment. Oral health-related quality of life and satisfaction with the dentures will be the primary outcome variables. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios will be estimated and graphically presented on cost-effectiveness planes. A Markov decision tree will be constructed to set out the consequences of the competing alternatives. Sensitivity analysis on the most important assumptions will be performed in order to assess the robustness of the model.

Discussion

This is the first trial-based cost-effectiveness study on single-implant mandibular overdentures. Specific challenges in designing the protocol are considered. The expected results are of high clinical relevance and may contribute to the decision-making process when choosing between different alternatives for the rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02710357, registered on 11 March 2016.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Petersen PE, Bourgeois D, Ogawa H, et al. The global burden of oral diseases and risks to oral health. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83:661–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Peres MA, Barbato PR, Reis SC, Freitas CH, Antunes JL. Tooth loss in Brazil: analysis of the 2010 Brazilian Oral Health Survey. Rev Saude Publica. 2013;47 Suppl 3:78–89 [Article in Portuguese].CrossRefPubMed
4.
Carlsson GE, Omar R. The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37:143–56.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, et al. The McGill Consensus Statement on Overdentures. Montreal, Quebec, Canada. May 24–25, 2002. Int J Prosthodont. 2002;15:413–4.PubMed
6.
Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C, Moynihan P, Müller F, Naert I, et al. Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients—the York Consensus Statement. Br Dent J. 2009;207:185–96.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Harris D, Höfer S, O’Boyle CA, Sheridan S, Marley J, Benington IC, et al. A comparison of implant-retained mandibular overdentures and conventional dentures on quality of life in edentulous patients: a randomized, prospective, within-subject controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24:96–103.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Klemetti E. Is there a certain number of implants needed to retain an overdenture? J Oral Rehabil. 2008;35:80–4.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Walton JN, Glick N, MacEntee MI. A randomized clinical trial comparing patient satisfaction and prosthetic outcomes with mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. Int J Prosthodont. 2009;22:331–9.PubMed
10.
Cordioli G, Majzoub Z, Castagna S. Mandibular overdentures anchored to single implants: a five-year prospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;78:159–65.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Liddelow G, Henry P. The immediately loaded single implant-retained mandibular overdenture: a 36-month prospective study. Int J Prosthodont. 2010;23:13–21.PubMed
12.
Kronstrom M, Davis B, Loney R, Gerrow J, Hollender L. A prospective randomized study on the immediate loading of mandibular overdentures supported by one or two implants; a 3 year follow-up report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014;16:323–9.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Cheng T, Sun G, Huo J, He X, Wang Y, Ren YF. Patient satisfaction and masticatory efficiency of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures using the stud and magnetic attachments. J Dent. 2012;40:1018–23.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Srinivasan M, Makarov NA, Herrmann FR, Müller F. Implant survival in 1- versus 2-implant mandibular overdentures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(1):63–72. http://​dx.​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​clr.​12513. Epub ahead of print.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Harder S, Wolfart S, Egert C, Kern M. Three-year clinical outcome of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures—results of preliminary prospective study. J Dent. 2011;39:656–61.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Grover M, Vaidyanathan AK, Veeravalli PT. OHRQoL, masticatory performance and crestal bone loss with single-implant, magnet-retained mandibular overdentures with conventional and shortened dental arch. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25:580–6.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Bryant SR, Walton JN, MacEntee MI. A 5-year randomized trial to compare 1 or 2 implants for implant overdentures. J Dent Res. 2015;94:36–43.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Passia N, Wolfart S, Kern M. Six-year clinical outcome of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures—a pilot study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014. http://​dx.​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​clr.​12427. [Epub ahead of print].
19.
20.
Esfandiari S, Lund JP, Penrod JR, Savard A, Thomason JM, Feine JS. Implant overdentures for edentulous elders: study of patient preference. Gerodontology. 2009;26:3–10.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Moher D, Schulz K, Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1.
22.
Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, Augustovski F, Briggs AH, Mauskopf J, Loder E. ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines-CHEERS Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)—explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013;16(2):231–50.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Barcelos BA. Satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life of single-implant mandibular overdenture wearers, Federal University of Goiás [Thesis]. 2014.
24.
25.
Kernan WN, Viscoli CM, Makuch RW, Brass LM, Horwitz RI. Stratified randomization for clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52(1):19–26.CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: antibiotics at dental implant placement to prevent complications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(Issue 7):CD004152. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD004152.​pub4.
28.
Altieri KT, Sanitá PV, Machado AL, Giampaolo ET, Pavarina AC, Vergani CE. Effectiveness of two disinfectant solutions and microwave irradiation in disinfecting complete dentures contaminated with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012;143(3):270–7.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Lekholm U, Zarb GA. Patient selection and preparation. In: Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, editors. Tissue integrated prosthesis. Chicago: Quintessence; 1985. p. 199–209.
30.
Moore A, Collins S, Carroll D, McQuay H, Edwards J. Single dose paracetamol (acetaminophen), with and without codeine, for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;2:CD001547.
31.
Souza RF, et al. Reliability and validation of a Brazilian version of the Oral Health Impact Profile for assessing edentulous subjects. J Oral Rehabil. 2007;34:821–6.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Souza RF, Leles CR, Guyatt GH, et al. Exploratory factor analysis of the Brazilian OHIP for edentulous subjects. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37:202–8.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Schimmel M, Christou P, Miyazaki H, Halazonetis D, Herrmann FR, Müller F. A novel colourimetric technique to assess chewing function using two-coloured specimens: Validation and application. J Dent. 2015;43(8):955–64.CrossRefPubMed
34.
McGarry TJ, Nimmo A, Skiba JF, Ahlstrom RH, Smith CR, Koumjian JH. Classification system for complete edentulism. J Prosthodont. 1999;8:27–39.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Ramsey S, Willke R, Briggs A, Brown R, Buxton M, Chawla A, Cook J, Glick H, Liljas B, Petitti D, Reed S. Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. Value Health. 2005;8(5):521–33.CrossRefPubMed
36.
37.
Drummond M, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.
38.
Bassi F, Carr AB, Chang TL, Estafanous EW, Garrett NR, Happonen RP, Koka S, Laine J, Osswald M, Reintsema H, Rieger J, Roumanas E, Salinas TJ, Stanford CM, Wolfaardt J. Economic outcomes in prosthodontics. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26(5):465–9.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Vogel R, Smith-Palmer J, Valentine W. Evaluating the health economic implications and cost-effectiveness of dental implants: a literature review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28(2):343–56.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Antczak-Bouckoms AA, Tulloch JF, White BA, Capilouto EI. Methodological considerations in the analysis of cost effectiveness in dentistry. J Public Health Dent. 1989;49(4):215–22.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Leake JL, Birch S. Public policy and the market for dental services. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2008;36(4):287–95.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Shariati B, MacEntee MI, Yazdizadeh M. The economics of dentistry: a neglected concern. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013;41(5):385–94.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Cost-effectiveness analysis of the single-implant mandibular overdenture versus conventional complete denture: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Túlio Eduardo Nogueira
Shahrokh Esfandiari
Cláudio Rodrigues Leles
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1646-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Trials 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research

What is the impact of obtaining medical clearance to participate in a randomised controlled trial examining a physical activity intervention on the socio-demographic and risk factor profiles of included participants?

Research

Guided Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy in patients with non-cardiac chest pain – a pilot randomized controlled study

Erratum

Erratum to: ‘TElmisartan in the management of abDominal aortic aneurYsm (TEDY): The study protocol for a randomized controlled trial’

Erratum

Erratum to: ‘Early versus late initiation of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (The ELAIN-Trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial’

Research

Exploring methods the for selection and integration of stakeholder views in the development of core outcome sets: a case study in reconstructive breast surgery

Study protocol

Glycopyrrolate in comparison to hyoscine hydrobromide and placebo in the treatment of hypersalivation induced by clozapine (GOTHIC1): study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility study