PEEK Versus Metallic Attachment-retained Obturators

NCT ID: NCT04778254

Last Updated: 2021-03-03

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

18 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-02-01

Study Completion Date

2019-08-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Patients' satisfaction evaluation and radiographic evaluation of the terminal abutments of attachment- retained maxillary obturators with metal framework versus milled PEEK framework in the management of maxillectomy cases.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Eighteen participants were randomly divided into three parallel groups (n=6). Participants of PEEK group received attachment-retained obturators with milled PEEK framework, metal group received an attachment-retained obturator with metallic framework and conventional group received conventional clasp-retained obturators with metallic framework (Control group). Evaluation included radiographic evaluation and patients' satisfaction where two scales were followed in this study, including "The Obturator Functioning Scale" and "The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Head and Neck 35" using one way ANOVA test.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Maxillary Neoplasms

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

conventional obturator

conventional group received conventional clasp-retained obturators with metallic framework (Control group).

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

conventional obturator

Intervention Type OTHER

clasp retained obturator for management of hemi maxillectomy

metallic attachment retained obturator

metal group received an attachment-retained obturator with metallic framework

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

metalic attachment retained obturator

Intervention Type OTHER

attachment retained obturator for management of hemi maxillectomy

PEEk attachment retained obturator

PEEK group received attachment-retained obturators with milled PEEK framework,

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

PEEK attachment retained obturator

Intervention Type OTHER

attachment retained obturator for management of hemi maxillectomy

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

PEEK attachment retained obturator

attachment retained obturator for management of hemi maxillectomy

Intervention Type OTHER

metalic attachment retained obturator

attachment retained obturator for management of hemi maxillectomy

Intervention Type OTHER

conventional obturator

clasp retained obturator for management of hemi maxillectomy

Intervention Type OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

milled PEEK obturator attachment retained obturator clasp retained obturator

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* patient underwent surgical removal of half of maxilla
* participants with a sufficient number of natural teeth(class I and \\or class IV Aramany classification) not less than 5 teeth, mouth opening is not less than 25 mm, intact soft palate,

Exclusion Criteria

* participants are exposed to radiotherapy or chemotherapy during last year.
* participant with congenital defect
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Cairo University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Sharaf Mohamed Yahia

Principal Investigator,

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Mohamed Sharaf, lecturer

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Beni-Suef University

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Mohamed Sharaf

Cairo, , Egypt

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Egypt

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

38/10/2018

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.