***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: Sensitivity or pain of the mucoperiosteum covering the m and ibular edentulous ridge is often thought to limit bite forces in complete-denture wearers . Therefore , bite forces with m and ibular implant-retained overdentures may depend on the degree of implant support . This study analyzed the effects of different degrees of support for the m and ibular denture on bite forces measured four years after denture treatment as part of a r and omized controlled clinical trial . All subjects had received new maxillary dentures and ( 1 ) mainly implant-borne overdentures on a transm and ibular implant ( TMI ) , ( 2 ) mucosa-borne overdentures on two cylindric permucosal IMZ implants , or ( 3 ) new conventional dentures in the m and ible .  Fifty-three women and 15 men ( mean age , 59.1 yrs ; range , 41 to 77 ) participated in this trial . Both unilateral and bilateral bite forces were recorded at different positions with a miniature strain gauge transducer and a mechanical bite fork , respectively . The subjects were asked to bite at three force levels . Results indicated that women had significantly lower maximum bite forces than men . Persons with m and ibular implant-retained overdentures had significantly higher unilateral and bilateral maximum bite forces than complete-denture wearers . However , bite forces did not differ between the mainly implant-borne ( TMI ) and mucosa-implant-borne ( IMZ ) implant systems . Therefore , it appears that differences in support for the m and ibular overdenture by dental implants are not reflected in bite force capabilities PURPOSE The aim of this systematic review is to address treatment outcomes of M and ibular implant overdentures relative to implant survival rate , maintenance and complications , and patient satisfaction . MATERIAL S AND METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted by a PubMed search strategy and h and - search ing of relevant journals from included studies . R and omized  Clinical  Trials ( RCT ) and comparative clinical trial studies on m and ibular implant overdentures until August , 2010 were selected . Eleven studies from 1098 studies were finally selected and data were analyzed relative to number of implants . RESULTS Six studies presented the data of the implant survival rate which ranged from 95 % to 100 % for 2 and 4 implant group and from 81.8 % to 96.1 % for 1 and 2 implant group . One study , which statistically compared implant survival rate showed no significant differences relative to the number of implants . The most common type of prosthetic maintenance and complications were replacement or reattaching of loose clips for 2 and 4 implant group , and denture repair due to the fracture around an implant for 1 and 2 implant groups . Most studies showed no significant differences in the rate of prosthetic maintenance and complication , and patient satisfaction regardless the number of implants . CONCLUSION The implant survival rate of m and ibular overdentures is high regardless of the number of implants . Denture maintenance is likely not inflenced substantially by the number of implants and patient satisfaction is typically high again regardless os the number of implants PURPOSE The purpose was to assess and compare self-reported oral health and oral and general health related quality of life ( OHRQoL and HRQoL ) in two groups of edentulous adults who reported dissatisfaction with their m and ibular dentures , and who were treated with a conventional relining of this denture or by having it converted into an implant-retained one . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Sixty subjects were r and omly allocated into two equal groups , a relined conventional denture ( RCD ) group and an implant-retained overdenture ( IOD ) group .  Data on demographics , oral health , OHRQoL , and HRQoL were recorded by means of a self-administered question naire at baseline , 3 months , and 2 years . RESULTS Fifty-four subjects completed the protocol , 28 in the IOD-group and 26 in the RCD-group . The IOD group reported significant improvement in oral health and Oral Health Impact Profile ( OHIP-20 ) sum score and all its domains after 3 months . The improvements remained stable at the 2-year control . The RCD group reported almost no significant improvements . Neither group reported improved HRQoL. CONCLUSION The results of this study support the findings from other RCT studies that to implant-retain the m and ibular denture significantly improves self-reported oral health and OHRQoL. This treatment modality should be a minimum st and ard of care in complete denture wearers dissatisfied with their m and ibular denture 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 Objectives : To evaluate masticatory efficiency ( ME ) and oral health-related quality of life ( OHRQoL ) in patients rehabilitated with implant-retained m and ibular overdentures . Methods : In this r and omized controlled clinical trial , 50 edentulous patients visiting the Implant Center and Department of Prosthodontics , West China College of Stomatology , Sichuan University , Chengdu , China between June 2010 and June 2012 were selected and received 2 implant-retained m and ibular overdenture treatments . All patients were rehabilitated with maxillary complete dentures . The ME and OHRQoL were determined both one month before the m and ibular complete denture was anchored to the osseointegrated implants , and 6 months after anchoring . Paired t-tests were used to compare means of ME , and oral health impact profile-49 ( OHIP-49 ) domains scores between pre- and post-implant . Linear regression models were utilized to seek correlations between ME and OHIP domains scores . Results : The ME increased from pre- to post-implant retained m and ibular overdentures significantly ( p<0.001 ) . The total OHIP score and 4 subscales scores were changed significantly from pre- to post-implant ; namely , functional limitation , psychological discomfort , physical disability , and physical pain . The total OHIP score , functional limitation , physical disability , and physical pain subscale scores were related to ME . Conclusion : Implant-retained m and ibular over dentures can significantly improve patients ’ ME and OHRQoL. The improvement in OHRQoL is mainly because of the improved ME . An improved chewing experience , and pain relief also contributes to improvement of 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 OBJECTIVE The aim of this 5-year prospect i ve comparative study was to evaluate treatment outcome ( survival rate , condition of hard and soft peri-implant tissues , patient satisfaction , prosthetic and surgical aftercare ) of m and ibular overdentures supported by two or four implants .  MATERIAL AND METHODS Sixty edentulous patients with a m and ibular height between 12 and 18 mm participated . Thirty patients were treated with an overdenture supported by two IMZ implants ( group A ) and 30 patients were treated with an overdenture supported by four IMZ implants ( group B ) . St and ardised clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated 6 weeks after completion of the prosthetic treatment and after 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 and 5 years of functional loading . Prosthetic and surgical aftercare was scored during the evaluation period . RESULTS One implant was lost ( group A ) during the healing period . There were no significant differences with regard to any of the studied clinical or radiographic parameters of the peri-implant tissues between the groups . None of the patients reported sensory disturbances in the lip or chin region . No differences in satisfaction were observed between the groups . With regard to aftercare , there was a tendency of a greater need of prosthetic interventions in group A , while correction of soft-tissue problems was restricted to patients of group B. CONCLUSION There is no difference in clinical and radiographical state of patients treated with an overdenture on two or four implants during a 5-year evaluation period . Patients of both groups were as satisfied with their overdentures OBJECTIVES To determine any difference in patient response to  implant overdentures  compared with conventional complete dentures alone . MATERIAL S AND METHODS In a r and omized , prospect i ve , controlled study , 122 edentulous patients ( Mean age 64 ; 39 men , 83 women ) underwent baseline assessment of denture satisfaction and quality of life using the Oral Health Impact Profile-49 ( OHIP-49 ) and a Denture Satisfaction Question naire . All patients were provided with new conventional complete dentures ( CCDs ) that they wore for 3 months , at which point they were reassessed using the same measures . Patients were r and omly assigned either to continue with CCDs ( CC group ) or to have implant-retained overdentures ( IODs ) made ( CI group ) . The CC group was assessed after a further 3 months ( 6 months after receiving CCDs ) . The CI group was assessed 3 months after receiving IODs . RESULTS Significant improvements in satisfaction and quality of life were found in the patients 3 months after receiving CCDs ( P < 0.05 ) . No further improvements were found in the CC group at 6 months on any of the measures . The CI group showed significant additional improvements at 3 months following IODs on the functional limitation , physical pain , psychological discomfort , physical disability , social disability , psychological disability and h and icap scales of the OHIP and on 10 of the 11 scales of the Denture Satisfaction Question naire ( P < 0.05 , ANOVA ) . CONCLUSIONS The findings show that , controlling for expectancy bias and variability in baseline levels , IODs significantly increase patient satisfaction , dental function and quality of life over and above those achieved with good quality CCDs PURPOSE The aim of this study was to compare , prospect ively , treatment with  implant-retained m and ibular overdentures versus conventional complete dentures . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Part 2 of this paper reports on the outcome after 7 years of denture use , using additional question naires . RESULTS Patients with implant-stabilized overdentures  continued to be more satisfied with their m and ibular dentures and their diet than those using conventional complete dentures . About 50 % of the implant group who completed the question naire had had their dentures remade . The other 50 % remained satisfied with their original dentures and were still using them at the 7-year review . The average chairside time spent on them was 467 minutes . CONCLUSIONS  M and ibular overdentures with two endosseous implants permit better function than conventional complete dentures 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 
    Output:
    
Conclusion : Regarding the edentulous m and ible , patients benefited more from the IOD with 2 implants , as determined by OHRQoL scores .