Four‐implant‐supported overdenture treatment in the maxilla. Part <scp>II</scp>: Speech‐ and oral health‐related quality of life in patients with implant‐supported overdentures in the maxilla—A prospective 3‐year follow‐up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Implant-supported overdentures (IOD) are becoming a more commonly used treatment in the dental practice and it risks causing speech problems. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was investigating the changes in speech, satisfaction with speech, and overall oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in edentulous patients during and after treatment with maxillary IODs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients receiving an IOD participated in speech assessment. They were examined preoperatively with their conventional denture (CD) with full palatal coverage, after connection of the implant-bar connected denture, without palatal coverage, and 3 years thereafter. The examination included assessment of articulation in speech, OHRQoL based on total OHIP-14, and satisfaction with overall oral health and speech (visual analogue scale). RESULTS: There was a reduction in mean number of articulation disorders from 1.00 at baseline to 0.55 at connection, although statistically insignificant (p = 0.059). Especially the /s/ sound is vulnerable. At 3 years follow-up, still 6/16 (37.5%) of the patients suffered from this speech problem. Overall satisfaction improved from 64.05/100 at baseline to 82.95/100 at connection (p = 0.008) and remained unchanged with 81.69/100 after 3 years follow-up. Patients' satisfaction with speech increased from 70.62/100 with CD to 82.63/100, 3 years follow-up (p = 0.009). Total OHIP-14 decreased from 21.45/56 with CD to 8.00/56 (p < 0.001) with IOD and 6.13/56 3 years after connection (p = 0.001). Significant improvement of all seven domains in OHRQoL was observed with IOD compared to CD. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with maxillary IODs show improved OHRQoL 3 years after connection of the IOD compared to the CD. Even though patients reported improvement of satisfaction and OHRQoL, articulation disorders were still present, suggesting that patients should be informed about possible speech issues.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".