***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: PURPOSE This r and omized clinical trial tested hypotheses that there are no differences in patient satisfaction , component costs , or treatment and maintenance times when m and ibular overdentures are retained by one or two implants . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Subjects wearing conventional complete dentures were r and omized to receive either one midline or two bilateral m and ibular implants followed by a m and ibular denture reline to incorporate implant retention . They indicated on a visual analog scale satisfaction with their dentures before implants and at 2 months and 1 year after implant retention . Satisfaction outcomes between the two groups were compared using the Wilcoxon/Mann-Whitney nonparametric rank test , while changes within each group were analyzed using signed-rank tests . Component costs and times for surgery , prosthodontic treatment , and maintenance were compared using nonparametric and t tests . RESULTS Eighty-six subjects enrolled in this study and 85 completed the 1-year follow-up , at which median satisfaction was 93 ( maximum 100 ) in the single-implant group and 94 in the two-implant group ( P > .5 ) . Within each group , median improvement in satisfaction was similarly dramatic ( approximately 44 ) and significant ( P < .001 ) . Prosthodontic maintenance time was similar for both groups ( P > .37 ) , but the single-implant group had significantly lower component costs ( P < .001 ) and lower times for surgery ( P = .002 ) , postsurgical denture maintenance ( P = .021 ) , and denture reline ( P < .001 ) . Five implants failed in four subjects , all in the two-implant group and all before denture reline . CONCLUSION Lower component costs and treatment times , with comparable satisfaction and maintenance time over the first year , indicate that a m and ibular overdenture retained by a single midline implant may be an alternative to the customary two-implant overdenture for maladaptive denture patients The effectiveness of dental implants  is widely studied , especially in terms of their clinical outcomes . However , from the policymaker 's point of view , variables other than safety and efficacy , such as the costs and effectiveness of dental implants  as compared to other treatment alternatives , are vital in decision making . This paper compares the costs of different treatment strategies in a r and omized clinical trial in patients with resorbed m and ibles and persistent problems with their conventional dentures : treatment with a m and ibular overdenture on permucosal dental implants ,  an overdenture on  a transm and ibular implant  , new dentures after preprosthetic surgery , and new dentures only . Data were gathered on an individual patient level to gain insight into specific cost episodes . Direct costs were subdivided into labor , material , technique , and overhead . Data concerning these components were gathered during the consecutive treatment phases in the first year . Results show that the re sources used to treat a patient with an overdenture supported by a transm and ibular implant are seven times those of a complete new set of dentures . Comparison of the cost ratio of an implant-retained overdenture supported by permucosal implants and conventional new prostheses proves less unfavorable : 1:3 . New dentures after preprosthetic surgery are almost as expensive as treatment with permucosal implants PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare elderly patients ' satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life with m and ibular two-implant overdentures and conventional dentures .  MATERIAL S AND METHODS Sixty edentulous subjects aged 65 to 75 years were r and omly assigned to two groups treated with maxillary conventional dentures and either a m and ibular conventional denture ( n = 30 ) or an overdenture supported by two implants with ball retainers ( n = 30 ) . Subjects rated their general satisfaction , as well as other features of their dentures ( comfort , stability , ability to chew , speech , esthetics , and cleaning ability ) , prior to treatment and 2 months postdelivery . Changes in ratings on the original Oral Health Impact Profile ( OHIP ) and its short form ( OHIP-EDENT ) were also used as indicators of oral health-related quality of life . RESULTS The primary outcome of this study , ratings of general satisfaction 2 months postdelivery , was significantly better in the group treated with m and ibular two-implant overdentures ( P = .001 ) . In addition , the implant group gave significantly higher ratings on comfort , stability , and ability to chew . Furthermore , using OHIP-EDENT , subjects who received m and ibular two-implant overdentures had significantly fewer oral health-related quality of life problems than did the conventional group . CONCLUSION These short-term results suggest that m and ibular two-implant overdentures combined with maxillary conventional dentures provide better function and oral health-related quality of life than conventional dentures Implementation of new therapies is usually governed by financial considerations , so efficacy studies should also include cost comparisons . The cost and effectiveness of m and ibular conventional dentures ( CD , n = 30 ) and  two-implant overdentures ( IOD , n = 30 ) were compared in elderly subjects .  Effectiveness ( Oral Health Impact Profile , OHIP-20 ) and cost were measured up to one year post-treatment . Data for subsequent years were estimated by the Delphi method . Using an average life expectancy of 17.9 years , the equalized annual costs ( in Canadian dollars ) were $ 399 for CD and $ 625 for IOD ( p < 0.001 ) , and the equalized annual values for the outcome ( OHIP-20 ) were 47.0 for CD and 31.3 for IOD treatment ( p < 0.05 ) . These values translate into a yearly additional cost for IOD treatment of $ 14.41 per OHIP-20 point . These results are key to the implementation of programs to provide this form of therapy for edentulous adults UNLABELLED Implant overdentures and conventional prostheses have been compared in several trials using a variety of functional and oral health-related quality of life ( OHQOL ) outcomes . In this paper , we describe the impact of implant overdentures on general and OHQOL in seniors . OBJECTIVES To compare the oral health-related and general quality of life of seniors ( aged 65 - 75 years ) who received either m and ibular implant overdentures or conventional dentures .  METHODS Sixty edentulous patients were recruited . Thirty received m and ibular overdentures retained by two implants ( IOD ) and a conventional maxillary denture , the other 30 subjects received new maxillary and m and ibular conventional complete dentures ( CD ) . All completed the 20-item version of the Oral Health Impact Profile ( OHIP-20 ) before treatment , then at two and 6 months after delivery of the dentures . The SF-36 general health question naire was completed at baseline and 6 months only . RESULTS Pretreatment and 6-month data from 55 subjects were analyzed . Those who received the IODs had significantly better OHIP-20 total scores at 6 months . Results for IOD subjects were also superior in the functional limitation , physical pain , physical disability and psychological disability subscales . While no significant between group difference was found on the SF-36 health survey , significant pre-post-treatment differences within the IOD group were detected for the role emotional , vitality and the social function scales . CONCLUSIONS M and ibular overdentures retained by two implants provide elderly patients with better OHQOL . General health-related quality of life improved in the implant group PURPOSE This study aim ed to compare the prosthetic aspects and patient satisfaction with prosthetic care in two-implant-retained m and ibular overdentures , whether implants were splinted with a bar or left with magnets or ball attachments . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Thirty-six completely edentulous patients had two Brånemark implants placed in the m and ibular canine area . A r and omized procedure allocated patients into three groups of equal size , each with a different attachment system : bars , magnets , or balls .  Prosthesis retention and mechanical as well as soft tissue complications were recorded in addition to patient satisfaction . A linear mixed model was fitted with attachment type and time as classification variables and adjusted by Turkey 's multiple range test . RESULTS Ball-retained overdentures showed at year 10 the greatest vertical retention force ( 1,327 g ) , followed by bars ( 1,067 g ) and magnets ( 219 g ) . In the ball group , need for tightening of abutment screws was the most common mechanical complication ; in the magnet and bar groups , respectively , the most common complications were wear and corrosion , and the need for clip activation . Prosthesis stability and chewing comfort for the overdenture were rated significantly lower for the magnet group compared to the ball and bar groups . Prosthesis stability of the maxillary denture was rated significantly lower in the bar group compared to ball and magnet groups . CONCLUSION The ball group scored best in relation to retention of the overdenture , soft tissue complications , and patient satisfaction at year 10 . The bar group scored lower for comfort and stability of the maxillary denture . Magnets offered patients the least comfort The importance of assessing the impact of treatments for chronic conditions on an individual 's quality of life has been well-established . In this r and omized clinical trial , oral-health-rclated quality of life , measured with the Oral Health Impact Profile ( OHIP ) , was compared between two groups of edentulous patients . One group ( n = 54 ) received m and ibular implant-supported overdentures  , and the other group ( n = 48 ) received conventional dentures . Assessment s were performed pre-treatment and two months after the prostheses were delivered . The multivariate model showed that implant treatment was significantly associated with lower post-treatment OHIP scores ( p = 0.0002 ) , indicating a better quality of life . In addition , pre-treatment OHIP scores , treatment allocation , age , sex , and marital status explained 31 % of the variation in post-treatment OHIP scores ( F = 0.0001 ) . These results suggest that implant treatment provides significant short-term improvement over conventional treatment in oral-health-related quality of life Studies have shown that m and ibular implant overdentures significantly increase satisfaction and quality of life of edentulous elders . Improved chewing ability appears to have a positive impact on nutritional state . Therefore , it is important to determine the best design of this prosthesis over the long term . In this r and omized controlled trial , three groups of edentulous participants with atrophic m and ibles wore 3 types of implant overdentures .  During an eight-year follow-up , only seven of the 110 participants had dropped out of this study . Almost all participants were still satisfied with their overdentures . Participant satisfaction concerning retention and stability of the  m and ibular overdenture had decreased significantly in the two-implant ball attachment group , whereas the opinion of participants in the single- and triple-bar groups was still at the same level . The long-term results suggest that a m and ibular overdenture retained by 2 implants with a single bar may be the best treatment strategy for edentulous people with atrophic ridges PURPOSE This work compared  implant-supported fixed prostheses and overdentures in the edentulous m and ible in a r and omized prospect i ve study of treatment results , clinical working hours , laboratory working hours , and laboratory costs including material s. MATERIAL S AND METHODS Seventeen subjects agreed to participate .  Three st and ard Brånemark implants were placed between the mental foramina in each patient . After the connection of st and ard abutments , subjects were r and omly assigned to the fixed  prosthesis group ( n = 11 ) or overdenture group ( n = 6 ) . Subjects in the fixed group were provided with prostheses according to the All-in-One concept . Subjects in the overdenture group received a conventional denture retained by a Dolder bar system . RESULTS One implant was lost in the fixed prosthesis group after 1 year . A new implant was placed , and the prosthesis was refitted . Mean clinical working hours were 3.1 in the fixed prosthesis group and 4.1 in the overdenture group . Mean laboratory working hours were 12.5 in the fixed prosthesis group and 7.7 in the overdenture group . Total laboratory costs , including material s , were on average about 1,700 US dollars for the fixed prosthesis and 1,350 US dollars for the overdenture . CONCLUSION A  fixed implant-supported prosthesis in the edentulous m and ible could be provided at about the same cost as an overdenture using the method described . Provided that the early survival results prove to be long lasting , the choice between a fixed and a removable prosthesis need not be a matter of economy The loss of natural teeth compromises chewing efficiency , and edentulous patients often have a diet that is deficient in fibre and vitamins . Prostheses that are retained on implants offer the possibility of overcoming some of the limitations of conventional dentures in terms of chewing efficiency . The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that improvement in satisfaction with oral prostheses would result in improved food selection in edentulous patients . This prospect i ve study involved three groups , namely ( i ) subjects who requested and received implants to stabilise a complete fixed or removable prosthesis ( IG , n = 26 ) , ( ii ) edentulous subjects who requested implant prostheses , but received conventional dentures ( CDG1 , n = 22 ) , and ( iii ) edentulous subjects who requested and received conventional dentures ( CDG2 , n = 35 ) . Data were collected using vali date d question naires pre- and postoperatively . Prior to treatment , all subjects were asked whether they ate a variety of hard and soft foods , to indicate the degree of difficulty they experienced when chewing these foods , and to rate their satisfaction with various aspects of their maxillary and m and ibular complete dentures . Following the completion of treatment , subjects completed the question naires again . Pre- and postoperative data 
    Output:
    
Implant-supported prostheses were more cost-effective when compared to conventional dentures and fixed implant-supported prostheses .
Overdentures supported by two implants and magnet attachment were reported as cost-effective .
CONCLUSION Implant-supported overdentures are a cost-effective treatment for edentulous patients .