Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
Texto Completo: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/21758 |
Resumo: | STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A number of methods have been described for the fabrication of complete dentures. There are 2 common ways to make conventional complete dentures: a traditional method and a simplified method. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to compare the efficiency of simplified and traditional methods for the fabrication of complete dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The review was conducted by 3 independent reviewers and included articles published up to December 2013. Three electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE-PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science. A manual search also was performed to identify clinical trials of simplified versus traditional fabrication of complete dentures. RESULTS: Six articles were classified as randomized controlled clinical trials and were included in this review. The majority of the selected articles analyzed general satisfaction, denture stability, chewing ability and function, comfort, hygiene, esthetics, speech function, quality of life, cost, and fabrication time. CONCLUSIONS: Although the studies reviewed demonstrate some advantages of simplified over traditional prostheses, such as lower cost and clinical time, good chewing efficiency, and a positive effect on the quality of life, the reports related the use of different simplified methods for the fabrication of complete dentures. Additional randomized controlled trials that used similar simplified techniques for the fabrication of complete dentures should be performed with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods. |
id |
UFRN_1a6b0317c276ede2344ff3e61f4872af |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/21758 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRN |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Paulino, Marcília R.Gurgel, Bruno Cesar de VasconcelosCalderon, Patricia dos SantosAlves, L. R.2017-01-26T13:06:40Z2017-01-26T13:06:40Z2015PAULINO, Marcília R. et al. Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: A systematic review. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, v. 113, n. 1, p. 12-16, 2015.https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/21758engDental implantationMethodsSimplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic reviewinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleSTATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A number of methods have been described for the fabrication of complete dentures. There are 2 common ways to make conventional complete dentures: a traditional method and a simplified method. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to compare the efficiency of simplified and traditional methods for the fabrication of complete dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The review was conducted by 3 independent reviewers and included articles published up to December 2013. Three electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE-PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science. A manual search also was performed to identify clinical trials of simplified versus traditional fabrication of complete dentures. RESULTS: Six articles were classified as randomized controlled clinical trials and were included in this review. The majority of the selected articles analyzed general satisfaction, denture stability, chewing ability and function, comfort, hygiene, esthetics, speech function, quality of life, cost, and fabrication time. CONCLUSIONS: Although the studies reviewed demonstrate some advantages of simplified over traditional prostheses, such as lower cost and clinical time, good chewing efficiency, and a positive effect on the quality of life, the reports related the use of different simplified methods for the fabrication of complete dentures. Additional randomized controlled trials that used similar simplified techniques for the fabrication of complete dentures should be performed with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRNinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)instacron:UFRNORIGINALSimplifiedVersusTraditional_Paulino_2015.pdfSimplifiedVersusTraditional_Paulino_2015.pdfhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25311792application/pdf445004https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/1/SimplifiedVersusTraditional_Paulino_2015.pdfe69e4e8d897496ba7cf57e9be9762a26MD51LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-81563https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/2/license.txt2fca3d993fd069474a9dfb5156c39499MD52TEXTSimplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication A systematic review_2015.pdf.txtSimplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication A systematic review_2015.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain26543https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/5/Simplified%20versus%20traditional%20techniques%20for%20complete%20denture%20fabrication%20A%20systematic%20review_2015.pdf.txt3dd3bf7073c6e3d4be2ff8d468b35fa1MD55THUMBNAILSimplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication A systematic review_2015.pdf.jpgSimplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication A systematic review_2015.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg7083https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/6/Simplified%20versus%20traditional%20techniques%20for%20complete%20denture%20fabrication%20A%20systematic%20review_2015.pdf.jpgd656a2080f970e62025784811b669396MD56123456789/217582021-12-21 14:06:43.613oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br: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ório de PublicaçõesPUBhttp://repositorio.ufrn.br/oai/opendoar:2021-12-21T17:06:43Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review |
title |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review |
spellingShingle |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review Paulino, Marcília R. Dental implantation Methods |
title_short |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review |
title_full |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review |
title_fullStr |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review |
title_sort |
Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: a systematic review |
author |
Paulino, Marcília R. |
author_facet |
Paulino, Marcília R. Gurgel, Bruno Cesar de Vasconcelos Calderon, Patricia dos Santos Alves, L. R. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Gurgel, Bruno Cesar de Vasconcelos Calderon, Patricia dos Santos Alves, L. R. |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Paulino, Marcília R. Gurgel, Bruno Cesar de Vasconcelos Calderon, Patricia dos Santos Alves, L. R. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Dental implantation Methods |
topic |
Dental implantation Methods |
description |
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A number of methods have been described for the fabrication of complete dentures. There are 2 common ways to make conventional complete dentures: a traditional method and a simplified method. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to compare the efficiency of simplified and traditional methods for the fabrication of complete dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The review was conducted by 3 independent reviewers and included articles published up to December 2013. Three electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE-PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science. A manual search also was performed to identify clinical trials of simplified versus traditional fabrication of complete dentures. RESULTS: Six articles were classified as randomized controlled clinical trials and were included in this review. The majority of the selected articles analyzed general satisfaction, denture stability, chewing ability and function, comfort, hygiene, esthetics, speech function, quality of life, cost, and fabrication time. CONCLUSIONS: Although the studies reviewed demonstrate some advantages of simplified over traditional prostheses, such as lower cost and clinical time, good chewing efficiency, and a positive effect on the quality of life, the reports related the use of different simplified methods for the fabrication of complete dentures. Additional randomized controlled trials that used similar simplified techniques for the fabrication of complete dentures should be performed with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2015 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2017-01-26T13:06:40Z |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2017-01-26T13:06:40Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv |
PAULINO, Marcília R. et al. Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: A systematic review. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, v. 113, n. 1, p. 12-16, 2015. |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/21758 |
identifier_str_mv |
PAULINO, Marcília R. et al. Simplified versus traditional techniques for complete denture fabrication: A systematic review. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, v. 113, n. 1, p. 12-16, 2015. |
url |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/21758 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRN instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) instacron:UFRN |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
instacron_str |
UFRN |
institution |
UFRN |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/1/SimplifiedVersusTraditional_Paulino_2015.pdf https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/2/license.txt https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/5/Simplified%20versus%20traditional%20techniques%20for%20complete%20denture%20fabrication%20A%20systematic%20review_2015.pdf.txt https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/21758/6/Simplified%20versus%20traditional%20techniques%20for%20complete%20denture%20fabrication%20A%20systematic%20review_2015.pdf.jpg |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
e69e4e8d897496ba7cf57e9be9762a26 2fca3d993fd069474a9dfb5156c39499 3dd3bf7073c6e3d4be2ff8d468b35fa1 d656a2080f970e62025784811b669396 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1814833012851867648 |