Skip to content

Comparison of two types of protocols for the construction of dentures

Comparison of different methods for making conventional complete dentures

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
REBEC
Registry ID
RBR-7rw2qq
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2017-06-09
Start date
2013-02-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-10-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Full edentulousness, Jaw, Edentulous, Quality of Life

Interventions

A total of 50 edentulous individuals of both genders will be included for treatment with conventional complete dentures. Participants will be systematically allocated into two groups: Simplified group
Procedure/surgery

Sponsors

Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal de Goias
Lead Sponsor
Universidade Federal de Goiás
Collaborator

Eligibility

Age
40 Years to 85 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Fully edentulous, with need of new upper and lower conventional complete dentures

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients unable to cooperate; Patients in poor general health or conditions that could influence their response to treatment such as temporomandibular disorders, orofacial motor disorders, severe oral manifestations of systematic disease or psychological or psychiatric condition

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Expected primary outcome: Oral health related quality of life impacts were measured using the Brazilian version of the Oral Health Impact Profile for edentulous subjects (Brazilian OHIP-EDENT) , considering the overall scale and its four different scale domains: masticatory discomfort and disability (four items), (2) psychological discomfort and disability (five items), social disability (five items) and oral pain and discomfort (five items).;Observed primary outcomes: Oral health-related quality of life impacts: there were no differences in the comparison of the OHIP-Edent scores (overall scale and specific domains) between the simplified group and the traditional group (p=0.395)

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Expected secondary outcomes: Number of treatment sessions and maintenance sessions, measured by the information described on the patients' files.;Observed secondary outcomes: The number of clinical appointments until the delivery of the dentures was lower (p=0.001) for the simplified group (4.18) compared to the traditional group (5.0). No significant differences between groups using the FAD rating scale (p=0.373) and the Kapur index scores (p=0.788).

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Public ContactCláudio Leles

Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal de Goias

crleles@odonto.ufg.br55 (62) 3521-1882

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP)