Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 31, 2025
Impact of Fabrication Techniques and Polishing Procedures on Surface Roughness of Denture Base Resins
Published on: January 17, 2025
Patient-reported outcomes and efficiency of complete dentures made with simplified methods: A meta-analysis
Asim Al-Ansari1, Maha El Tantawi1
1Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Background:
An increasing lifetime expectancy of the elderly highlights the importance of prosthodontic techniques, such as preparing complete dentures, which can restore the complete loss of teeth.
Objectives:
The present study compared patient-reported outcomes and efficiency in terms of preparation time and cost of a simplified complete denture (SCD) and a conventional complete denture (CCD) in edentulous patients using a meta-analysis of clinical trials (CTs).
Material And Methods:
A literature search was conducted for studies comparing SCD and CCD in MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus and World of Science, and through analyzing the reference lists of the retrieved studies, without language or time limits. Studies fitting the pre-specified inclusion criteria were assessed for quality and the extracted data referred to the following issues: patient satisfaction measured using a 100-millimeter visual analog scale (VAS); impact on quality of life estimated using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)-19 on a scale from 0 to 38; the proportion of cost of SCD to CCD; and time in minutes to deliver dentures. The results were pooled in meta-analyses and displayed in forest plots.
Results:
Eleven publications referring to 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There were no differences between SCD and CCD in patient satisfaction (mean difference: 0.896, 95% CI (confidence interval): -2.947, 4.739) or their impact on quality of life (mean difference: 0.379, 95% CI: -0.994, 1.751). It required significantly less time to deliver SCD (mean difference: -274.16, 95% CI: -348.37, -199.96) and it cost significantly less (proportion: 0.740, 95% CI: 0.597, 0.882). Both SCD and CCD similarly impacted the patient's quality of life and satisfaction. It took about 4.5 h less to deliver SCD to patients as compared to CCD and the cost of SCD was 75% of the cost of CCD.
Conclusions:
Compared to CCD, SCD had a similar impact in terms of satisfaction and quality of life with reduced treatment time and cost. More studies are needed in low-resource settings, where SCD may have a greater advantage.
