Materials (Feb 2021)

Ball versus Locator<sup>®</sup> Attachments: A Retrospective Study on Prosthetic Maintenance and Effect on Oral-Health-Related Quality of Life

  • Silvia Brandt,
  • Hans-Christoph Lauer,
  • Michael Fehrenz,
  • Jan-Frederik Güth,
  • Georgios Romanos,
  • Anna Winter

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14041051
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 14, no. 4
p. 1051

Abstract

Read online

Locator® and ball attachments are well-established systems to attach overdentures to two inter-foraminal implants. This study aimed to evaluate differences between the two systems regarding prosthetic maintenance and patients’ oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). Dental records of patients with a mandibular implant-retained overdenture were retrospectively analyzed. Prosthetic maintenance measures involving the denture suprastructure and attachment matrix and patrix were analyzed. Furthermore, the Oral Health Impact Profile-G14 (OHIP-G14) was used to evaluate OHRQoL. Results were analyzed by means of Kaplan–Meier analysis and Student’s t- and log-rank tests. The records of 122 patients were evaluated. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis revealed a significant difference between ball attachments (Group B; n patients = 47) and Locator® attachments (Group L; n patients = 75) regarding the occurrence of denture fractures (p p = 0.028) and patrix (p = 0.030). Group L had a significantly lower total OHIP-G14 score than Group B (p = 0.002). The most common maintenance events were matrix-related and denture relining for both attachment systems. Group B required more maintenance measures than Group L. Moreover, patients in Group L had better OHRQoL than patients in Group B.

Keywords