Simplified Technique in Removable Complete Prosthesis Versus Conventional Technique in Edentulous Patients
NCT ID: NCT06698978
Last Updated: 2024-11-21
Study Results
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.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
62 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-01-01
2028-03-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Design:
This is a multicenter, randomized, cross-over study with 62 patients over 11 months of participation, including a one-month washout between treatments. Patients will receive both types of dentures, with the order randomized.
Population:
The trial targets edentulous patients, both uni- and bi-maxillary, aged 18 or older, with certain health and dental conditions.
Key Assessments:
Quality of Life: OHIP-20 scores are collected pre-treatment and after three months for each denture type.
Patient Satisfaction and Denture Quality: Assessed using modified Kapur criteria and patient satisfaction surveys.
Masticatory Performance: Evaluated with a chewing gum test. Medical Economic Impact: Cost analysis of each denture type.
Anticipated Outcomes:
Benefits include reducing costs and treatment times, enhancing accessibility to dentures, particularly for elderly and underserved populations, and adapting dental education to teach this simplified technique.
Centers Involved:
Seven centers across France, including AP-HP hospitals and private practices.
Timeline:
The inclusion period is 24 months, with a total study duration of 35 months.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Impact of Removable Versus Fixed Implant-supported Prostheses in Oral Health Quality of Life for Edentulous Patients
NCT05162963
Simplified Versus Conventional Complete Dentures
NCT05069909
Simplified Versus Conventional Technique for Complete Denture Fabrication.
NCT02652403
Simplified vs. Conventional Methods for Complete Denture Fabrication
NCT01230320
Comparison Between Conventional and Digital Workflow in Dental Prosthesis
NCT06215781
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Since January 2021, the CCAM has imposed a RAC0 (remaining charge 0) for complete removable prostheses (PAC) with capped fees. These blocked fees make it difficult to produce high quality prostheses according to the conventional protocol. The blocked fees encourage liberal dentists to refer these patients to medical centres or hospital services. In addition, in areas of medical desertification, a shorter treatment time would be beneficial for patients and practitioners.
During the last five years, international literature has brought out simplified protocols to achieve PACs, shorter and more economical than conventional protocols. According to these studies there is no significant difference in quality of life for completely edentulous patients. However, these simplified AHRC implementation protocols are not harmonized and the simplification does not involve the same steps according to the protocols or the same classes of complete edentulous. In addition, these simplified protocols are not taught because they are too recent and with insufficient evidence from well-conducted clinical trials.
The hypothesis is that a new prosthetic realization technique with a single imprint, according to an innovative protocol, is not inferior in terms of quality of life than the conventional realization technique with two impressions in PAC.
The main objective of this study is to demonstrate the non-inferiority of a complete removable prosthesis made according to the simplified protocol compared to a complete removable prosthesis made according to the conventional protocol on quality of life, after 3 months of use of each prosthesis, in patients with complete single-maxillary or bi-maxillary edentesis (upper and/or lower arcada).
Primary Assessment Criterion : Variation in the total score on the OHIP-20 (Oral Health Impact Profile-20) questionnaire between inclusion and 3 months after prosthesis placement.
The OHIP 20 is a scale of oral quality of life, specific to total edentulousness, validated in French. It has 20 items rated from 1 to 6 (minimum score 20-maximum score 120). For each item, a score of 6 corresponds to an optimal quality of life.
Secondary objectives of research
* Compare the chair time between the two prostheses
* Compare patient satisfaction for each prosthesis using the Celebic \& Knezovic-Zlataric questionnaire
* Compare the quality of prostheses using modified KAPUR criteria (retention and stability)
* Compare the cost of simplified restoration with that of conventional technique, estimate the national impact of the diffusion of simplified technique, and estimate the differential cost ratio results.
* Compare the patient's chewing performance between the two prostheses
Secondary evaluation criteria :
* Cumulative measurement of time spent (in minutes) at the chair for prosthesis fabrication and adjustment steps
* Measurement of patient satisfaction on different items for each prosthesis using the Celebic \& Knezovic-Zlataric questionnaire at the beginning of each sequence and after 3 months of wearing each prosthesis
* Measurement of the quality of prostheses according to the Kapur score Modified (retention: 0 to 2; stability: 0 to 3)
* The full cost of manufacturing each prosthesis
* The additional cost per OHIP-20 point
* Measurement of masticatory performance after 3 months, for each prosthesis
Acts or Product being researched: Second PAC under the simplified protocol (PS)
This is a randomized, cross-over clinical trial consisting of two 3-month treatment periods spaced out by a 1-month wash-out period.
For complete bi-maxillary edentuses, a single arch is considered in the study but the other antagonist arch is performed according to a conventional protocol. The arcade considered will be randomized in case of bi-maxillary edentury and then randomization will be performed by minimization according to the following criteria: edentury arcade considered (maxillary or mandibular), center, complete edentury class (Grade 1-2 versus 3-4 according to the American College of Prosthodontists).
The cross-over test can be applied to complete edentulous disease as it is a chronic condition.
It should be noted that during the prosthetic realization stages, patients are carriers of their old removable prosthesis, possibly readapted.
A quality of life measurement (OHIP-20) will be performed with the old prosthesis before each of the prostheses (M4, M8) and 3 months after each of the PC or PS prostheses (M7, M11).
The time taken to complete each prosthesis will be measured in minutes from the imprint stage to the placement stage. In addition, the time spent on adjustments and focus will also be measured in minutes from the time of installation to 30 days after the insertion of new prostheses.
The patient will have to complete a specific satisfaction questionnaire using the Celebic \& Knezovic-Zlataric questionnaire with the old prosthesis before wearing each of the prostheses (M4, M8) and 3 months after wearing each of the PC or PS prostheses (M7, M11).
The quality of the old prosthesis will be evaluated at PAC 1 to 4 months (M4) and the quality of each new prosthesis (PC or PS) after 3 months of wearing each of the prostheses (M7, M11). The quality of the prosthesis will be measured with the modified Kapur score: from 0 to 3 for retention and from 0 to 2 for stability, or an overall score of 0 to 5.
The chewing performance will be evaluated with the old prosthesis before wearing each of the prostheses (M4, M8) and 3 months after wearing each of the prostheses PC or PS (M7, M11). The chewing performance will be assessed using specific chewing gum. After 20 chewing cycles, we will collect the mixture of a two-coloured gum that is crushed in a calibrated way. The evaluation of the colour mix is evaluated with a grid that allows to assign a masticatory performance score on a scale from 1 to 5
At the end of the study, the patient chooses his or her preferred prosthesis. The other prosthesis is used as a back-up prosthesis.
Statistical analysis : The main analysis will be performed in the per-protocol (PP) and intent to treat (ITT) population. An interaction between effect period and treatment will be first sought; then, in the absence of interaction, the effect treatment will be analyzed. If an interaction is found, only the first period will be analyzed. Sensitivity analyses with adjustment to the initial quality of life level and adjustment to minimization criteria will also be performed.
The total OHIP-20 score at the end of each period will be compared between the two prostheses. The variation in OHIP-20 score will be expressed in each PC and PS prosthesis group by the mean standard deviation and the difference between the two prostheses will be calculated
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
Arm with complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 2 (3 months)
Arm with complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS) in period 2 (3 months)
OTHER
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Simplified(PS)/Conventional(PC)
Complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 2 (3 months).
Simplified protocol (PS)/Conventional protocol (PC)
Complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 2 (3 months).
Conventional(PC)/Simplified (PS)
Complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS) in period 2 (3 months).
Conventional protocol (PC)/Simplified protocol (PS)
Complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS)in period 2 (3 months).
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Simplified protocol (PS)/Conventional protocol (PC)
Complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 2 (3 months).
Conventional protocol (PC)/Simplified protocol (PS)
Complete removable denture according to the conventional protocol (PC) in period 1 (3 months), 1 month of wash-out then complete removable denture according to the simplified protocol (PS)in period 2 (3 months).
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Complete single-maxillary (upper or lower arcade) or bimaxillar (upper and lower arcade) edentesis paired with non-iatrogenic removable full dentures (possibly readapted)
* Edentulous arcade with healthy or sanitized mucosa
* Sufficient inter arcade space
* Free and informed consent
* Adequate understanding of written and spoken French
* Membership of a social security scheme
Exclusion Criteria
* Presence of pathological lesions of the oral mucosa
* Parkinson's disease
* Gougerot-Sjögren's disease,
* Patient with cancer of the upper aerogribogastic tract
* Patient in psychiatric care
* Patient with neurological disease (vascular algia of the face, trigeminal neuralgia,...)
* Patient with xerostomia
* Allergy identified to resin
* Patient deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision
* Patient under legal protection (guardianship, curatorship)
* Patient under AME (State Medical Aid)
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Christophe RIGNON-BRET
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
APHP
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
AOR22023
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.