Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

Patient satisfaction with two designs of implant supported removable overdentures; ball attachment and magnets

Lookup NU author(s): Professor Janice EllisORCiD, Professor Angus Walls, Professor Mark Thomason


Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.


Objective The aim of this study was to compare ball and magnet attachments within implant-supported mandibular overdentures (ISMOD) using patient centred outcome measures. Our a priori hypothesis was that there is no difference in patient satisfaction between the two attachment types. Material and methods In this within-subject crossover randomised clinical trial, edentulous patients were recruited to the study and completed a denture satisfaction questionnaire before having two implants placed in the intraforaminal region of the mandible. They were randomly assigned to receive an ISMOD retained by either ball or magnetic attachment. After 3 months satisfaction questionnaires were repeated before attachments were changed to the alternative design. After a further 3 months patients completed final questionnaires. Patients were asked to choose their preferred prostheses and record the most influential factors in their final choice. The outcome variables of patient satisfaction were compared between baseline and the two attachment types using non-parametric two-related sample tests (Wilcoxon's signed rank). Results and discussion Sixteen patients completed the study. Patient satisfaction improved significantly between baseline and the new prosthesis with each attachment type for all domains of satisfaction (P < 0.05). Ball attachments provided greater satisfaction in the domains of general satisfaction, stability and ability to chew (P < 0.05). Patients' general satisfaction with ball attachment retained overdentures was greater than that for magnetic attachments; however, both designs provide significantly greater satisfaction than conventional dentures. In this study, the majority preferred to retain the ball attachment although one-third of patients actively chose the magnetic attachment. To cite this article:Ellis JS, Burawi G, Walls A, Thomason JM. Patient satisfaction with two designs of implant supported removable overdentures; ball attachment and magnets.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 20, 2009; 1293-1298doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01810.x.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Ellis JS, Burawi G, Walls A, Thomason JM

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Clinical Oral Implants Research

Year: 2009

Volume: 20

Issue: 11

Pages: 1293-1298

ISSN (print): 0905-7161

ISSN (electronic): 1600-0501

Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.


DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01810.x


Altmetrics provided by Altmetric