Patient Satisfaction , Prosthetic Complications and Clinical Outcomes of PEEK Composite Versus Titanium Zirconium

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

30 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2022-04-15

Study Completion Date

2023-04-02

Brief Summary

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

This study aimed to evaluate patient satisfaction (VAS) , prosthetic outcomes and clinical outcomes of polyether ether ketone (PEEK) Versus Titanium Zirconium fixed prostheses supported by six maxillary implants and opposed by distal extension removable partial denture.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Patient Satisfaction, Peri-implant Parameters and Crestal Bone Evaluation of PEEK (Polyetheretherketone) Abutments Versus Zirconium Abutments Restored With PEEK Based Superstructure

NCT03714074

Patients Satisfaction

UNKNOWN NA

Patient's Satisfaction of Mandibular Implant Supported Overdentures With Reduced Denture Base Extensions.

NCT06850558

Patient Satisfaction Using Implant Retained Overdentures

COMPLETED NA

PEEK Vs Titanium for All-on-4 Prosthesis

NCT06700733

Satisfaction, Patient Bite Force

COMPLETED NA

Two Years Follow up of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Sub-periosteal Implant Retaining Maxillary Fixed Prosthesis

NCT05193110

Mastication Disorder

COMPLETED NA

Clinical Performance and Stability of Different Types of Implant Supported Overdenture

NCT05972538

Complete Edentulism

COMPLETED NA

Detailed Description

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

thirty patients were selected for this study from a previous study who have already received previous implants in the maxillary arch. The patients were divided into two groups: Group1 received maxillary titanium zirconium full arch fixed prosthesis and mandibular distal extension partial denture, Group 2 received maxillary PEEK composite full arch fixed prosthesis and mandibular distal extension partial denture Patient satisfaction was evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) after one year months , Prosthetic complications were measured on the patient and implant levels after one year

Conditions

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

Patient Satisfaction Prosthetic Complication Clinical Outcomes

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

Investigators

Study Groups

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

maxillary titanium zirconium full arch fixed prosthesis

maxillary titanium zirconium full arch fixed prosthesis and mandibular distal extension partial denture.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Osstell® device (Integration Diagnostics Ltd.).

Intervention Type DEVICE

After trans-mucosal abutments were removed and the smart pegs were attached to the fixtures, resonance frequency analysis was done to assess implant stability.The implant stability quotient (ISQ) was used to quantify stability via the Osstell® device (Integration Diagnostics Ltd.).

maxillary peek composite full arch fixed prosthesis

maxillary peek composite full arch fixed prosthesis and mandibular distal extension partial denture.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Osstell® device (Integration Diagnostics Ltd.).

Intervention Type DEVICE

After trans-mucosal abutments were removed and the smart pegs were attached to the fixtures, resonance frequency analysis was done to assess implant stability.The implant stability quotient (ISQ) was used to quantify stability via the Osstell® device (Integration Diagnostics Ltd.).

Interventions

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

Osstell® device (Integration Diagnostics Ltd.).

After trans-mucosal abutments were removed and the smart pegs were attached to the fixtures, resonance frequency analysis was done to assess implant stability.The implant stability quotient (ISQ) was used to quantify stability via the Osstell® device (Integration Diagnostics Ltd.).

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

Normal jaw relation Good oral hygiene Patient with class I or class II inter-rach space in order to have sufficient restoration space to construct FP3 prosthesis.

Exclusion Criteria

Patients with TMJ disorder and heavy smokers for more than 10 cigarettes per day.

Uncooperative patient. Unfavorable occlusion. Limited restoration space (less than 12 mm).

Minimum Eligible Age

58 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

68 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes