Evaluation of the quality of life and satisfaction in patients using complete dentures versus mandibular overdentures. Systematic review and meta‐analysis

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes edentulism as a physical impairment that results in a negative impact in the daily activities. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the satisfaction and the quality of life, in patients treated with implant retained overdentures with two mandibular implants (IOD) against those with mandibular conventional complete dentures (CCD). METHODS: Different search strategies were used to screen for articles in Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane Library and Scielo of the last 17 years (2003–2020). The keywords used were: “quality of life OR satisfaction” AND “complete denture OR conventional denture” AND “overdenture OR implant retained.” RESULTS: Six articles and two more were added by manual search. The population was 400 in the CCD and 412 for IOD. The mean age was 64.3 ± 6.41 years. The group was comprised of 283 men and 427 women. The scores obtained in the visual analog scale (VAS) before and after the treatment were statistically significant in favor of the IOD for overall satisfaction, (WMD: 12.329; 95% CI: 4.873 to 19.784, p‐value = 0.001), comfort, speech and stability. For esthetics and chewing there was non‐significant improvement while hygiene worsened for the IOD. For the comparison after the treatment between both treatment modalities a statistically significant improvement was found in overall satisfaction (WMD: 14.408; 95% CI: 8.589 to 20.226, p‐value < 0.001), comfort, speech, chewing and stability in favor of the IOD but not in esthetics or hygiene. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta‐analysis show the superiority of the IOD, despite is not achieved in all aspects.