O-Ring and Bar-Clip: A Comparative Analysis of Retention in Overdenture Prostheses - A Systematic Review.

IF 1.1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
B L P Araujo, J D C Tardelli, C A S Celles, A C Dos Reis
{"title":"O-Ring and Bar-Clip: A Comparative Analysis of Retention in Overdenture Prostheses - A Systematic Review.","authors":"B L P Araujo, J D C Tardelli, C A S Celles, A C Dos Reis","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_2727Araujo08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Mandibular implant-supported overdentures (IODs) show higher retention than conventional complete dentures. However, there is no consensus on the best attachment to ensure resistance to vertical displacement. The most used are o-ring and bar-clip. This systematic review answered \"Which type of attachment for overdenture prosthesis provides higher retention: o-ring or bar-clip?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was followed and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The search was applied to 5 databases and grey literature. The selection process occurred in two blinded steps by the reviewers following the eligibility criteria: a randomized clinical trial comparing retention between o-ring and bar-clip in IODs. The risk of bias was analyzed by RoB II.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>206 articles were found, and after removing the duplicates 136 were evaluated by title and abstract of which 24 were selected for full reading, 5 met the eligibility criteria, and all had a high risk of bias. The bar-clip provided higher retention than o-ring in four studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The bar-clip system provides a higher retention rate than the o-ring. In addition, the selection of attachment systems is dependent on the patient's anatomical-functional and economic conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2727Araujo08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Mandibular implant-supported overdentures (IODs) show higher retention than conventional complete dentures. However, there is no consensus on the best attachment to ensure resistance to vertical displacement. The most used are o-ring and bar-clip. This systematic review answered "Which type of attachment for overdenture prosthesis provides higher retention: o-ring or bar-clip?

Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was followed and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The search was applied to 5 databases and grey literature. The selection process occurred in two blinded steps by the reviewers following the eligibility criteria: a randomized clinical trial comparing retention between o-ring and bar-clip in IODs. The risk of bias was analyzed by RoB II.

Results: 206 articles were found, and after removing the duplicates 136 were evaluated by title and abstract of which 24 were selected for full reading, 5 met the eligibility criteria, and all had a high risk of bias. The bar-clip provided higher retention than o-ring in four studies.

Conclusions: The bar-clip system provides a higher retention rate than the o-ring. In addition, the selection of attachment systems is dependent on the patient's anatomical-functional and economic conditions.

O形环和条形卡环:义齿覆盖修复体固位的比较分析 - 系统性综述。
导言:与传统的全口义齿相比,下颌种植体支持覆盖义齿(IOD)具有更高的固位力。然而,对于确保抗垂直位移的最佳连接方式还没有达成共识。使用最多的是 O 形环和条形卡环。本系统综述回答了 "O形环和条形夹哪种义齿连接体的固位效果更好?遵循系统综述和元分析首选报告项目(PRISMA),并在国际系统综述前瞻性注册中心(PROSPERO)注册。检索范围包括 5 个数据库和灰色文献。筛选过程由审稿人按照资格标准分两步进行:比较 IOD 中 O 形环和条形夹保留率的随机临床试验。结果:共找到 206 篇文章,去除重复文章后,根据标题和摘要对 136 篇文章进行了评估,其中 24 篇被选中进行全文阅读,5 篇符合资格标准,所有文章的偏倚风险都很高。在四项研究中,条形夹的留置率高于O形环:结论:条形夹系统的固定率高于 O 形环。结论:条形夹系统的固定率高于 O 形环。此外,固定系统的选择取决于患者的解剖功能和经济条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信