JDSE
Journal of Dental Sciences and Education

The Journal of Dental Sciences and Education deals with General Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry, Restorative Dentistry, Orthodontics, Oral diagnosis and DentomaxilloFacial Radiology, Endodontics, Prosthetic Dentistry, Periodontology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Implantology, Dental Education and other dentistry fields and accepts articles on these topics. Journal of Dental Science and Education publishes original research articles, review articles, case reports, editorial commentaries, letters to the editor, educational articles, and conference/meeting announcements.

eISSN: 2980-1389
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.
EndNote Style

Online Manuscript System

Index
Original Article
Evaluation of prosthetic restorations in patients receiving dental implants according to patient demographics and treatment variables
Abstract
Aims: Patients receiving dental implant treatment may undergo rehabilitation with both implant-supported and conventional prosthetic restorations. Evaluating the distribution of these restorations according to demographic characteristics and implant number may help characterize prosthetic treatment patterns in clinical practice. This retrospective cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the types and counts of prosthetic restorations provided to patients who completed prosthetic rehabilitation following dental implant treatment at a university clinic between 2023 and 2024 and to examine their associations with age, gender, and implant number.
Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed the digital records of 514 adult patients who completed prosthetic rehabilitation following dental implant treatment at a university clinic between 2023 and 2024. Age, gender, implant number, and prosthetic restoration types and counts were recorded. Restorations included implant-supported crowns, implant-supported overdentures, tooth-supported metal-ceramic crowns, conventional complete dentures, and conventional removable partial dentures. Differences across age groups and between genders were assessed using the Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests, respectively. Post hoc pairwise comparisons were performed using Dunn’s test with Bonferroni adjustment. Associations between variables were evaluated using Spearman’s rank correlation analysis and simple linear regression. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results: The study included 514 patients with a mean age of 51.18 ± 13.50 years. Significant differences across age groups were observed in implant number and counts of all evaluated prosthetic restoration types (p < 0.05). Young adults had fewer implants, whereas the middle-aged group had higher counts of implant-supported crowns and tooth-supported metal-ceramic crowns. Implant-supported overdentures and conventional complete dentures had higher counts in the elderly group. A strong positive correlation was observed between implant number and implant-supported crown count (ρ = 0.791, p < 0.001), and a moderate positive correlation was found between age and implant-supported overdenture count (ρ = 0.409, p < 0.001). Men were significantly older than women (p = 0.003), whereas implant and prosthetic restoration counts did not differ significantly between genders (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: The distribution of prosthetic restorations among patients receiving dental implants differed significantly across age groups. These findings indicate an association between age and prosthetic treatment patterns and may inform treatment planning in conjunction with individual clinical needs.

Keywords : Dental implants, prosthetic rehabilitation, implant-supported prostheses, overdentures, age distribution

Download Article
Ethical Statement

This study was approved by the İnönü University Health Sciences Scientific Researches Ethics Committee (Date: 24.02.2026, Decision No: 2026/9438).

Informed Consent

This retrospective study used pre-existing anonymized patient data. No additional intervention was performed, and there was no direct patient contact. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee, and the requirement for written informed consent was waived by the ethics committee.

Author Contributions

Concept: AK; Design: AK; Control: AK; Resources: AK, FÖ; Materials: AK; Data Collection and/or Processing: AK, FÖ; Analysis and/or Interpretation: AK; Literature Review: AK; Writing the Article: AK, FÖ; Critical Review: AK, FÖ. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to this study.

Financial Disclosure

The authors received no financial support for the conduct or publication of this research.


1. Nulty A. A literature review on prosthetically designed guided implant placement and the factors influencing dental implant success. Br Dent J. 2024;236(3):169-180. doi:10.1038/s41415-024-7050-3
2. Sartoretto SC, Shibli JA, Javid K, et al. Comparing the long-term success rates of tooth preservation and dental implants: a critical review. J Funct Biomater. 2023;14(3):142. doi:10.3390/jfb14030142
3. Sailer I, Barbato L, Mojon P, et al. Single and partial tooth replacement with fixed dental prostheses supported by dental implants: a systematic review of outcomes and outcome measures used in clinical trials in the last 10 years. J Clin Periodontol. 2023;50(suppl 25):22-37. doi:10.1111/jcpe.13612
4. Messias A, Nicolau P, Guerra F. Different interventions for rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with implant-supported prostheses: an overview of systematic reviews. Int J Prosthodont. 2021;34(suppl):S63-S84. doi:10.11607/ijp.7162
5. Fathi A, Rismanchian M, Khodadadi R, Dezaki SN. Does the crown-implant ratio affect the survival and complications of implant-supported prostheses? A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;131(5):819-825. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.03.007
6. Papaspyridakos P, Bordin TB, Kim YJ, et al. Technical complications and prosthesis survival rates with implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses: a retrospective study with 1- to 12-year follow-up. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(1):3-11. doi:10.1111/jopr.13119
7. Chochlidakis K, Einarsdottir E, Tsigarida A, et al. Survival rates and prosthetic complications of implant fixed complete dental prostheses: an up to 5-year retrospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(5):539-546. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.11.022
8. Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C, et al. Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first-choice standard of care for edentulous patients-the York Consensus Statement. Br Dent J. 2009;207(4):185-186. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.728
9. Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Montreal, Quebec, May 24-25, 2002. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17(4):601-602.
10. Meijer HJA, Raghoebar GM, Batenburg RHK, Visser A, Vissink A. Mandibular overdentures supported by two or four endosseous implants: a 10-year clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(7):722-728. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01710.x
11. Scarano A, Inchingolo F, Alla I, et al. Patients’ satisfaction with mandibular overdentures retained using mini-implants: an up-to-16-year cross-sectional study. Prosthesis. 2024;6(2):251-262. doi:10.3390/prosthesis6020019
12. Srinivasan M, Kamnoedboon P, Angst L, Müller F. Oral function in completely edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported dental prostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2023;34(suppl 26):196-239. doi:10.1111/clr.14068
13. Sutariya PV, Shah HM, Patel SD, Upadhyay HH, Pathan MR, Shah RP. Mandibular implant-supported overdenture: a systematic review and meta-analysis for optimum selection of attachment system. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2021;21(4):319-327. doi:10.4103/jips.jips_158_21
14. Boboeva O, Kwon TG, Kim JW, Lee ST, Choi SY. Comparing factors affecting dental implant loss between age groups: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2021;23(2):208-215. doi:10.1111/cid.12967
15. Bayındır F, Oktay F, Kürüm M. The distribution of prosthetic treatments type, number, year applied and patients age and gender for patients applying to the prosthodontics department between 2014-2020. Erzincan Univ J Sci Technol. 2025;18(3):858-875.
16. Vemulapalli A, Mandapati SR, Kotha A, Rudraraju H, Aryal S. Prevalence of complete edentulism among US adults 65 years and older: a behavioral risk factor surveillance system study from 2012 through 2020. J Am Dent Assoc. 2024;155(5):399-408. doi:10.1016/j.adaj.2024.02.002
Article available in :
Volume 4, Issue 4, 2026
Page : 162-167
https://doi.org/10.51271/JDSE-0093
Article Information
Received : 24 Haz 2026
Accepted : 25 Eki 2026
Published : 28 Eki 2026
Corresponding Author :

Ayşe Karabaş: Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, İnönü University, Malatya, Turkiye

[email protected]
Citation : Karabaş A, Öcal F. Evaluation of prosthetic restorations in patients receiving dental implants according to patient demographics and treatment variables. J Dent Sci Educ. 2026;4(4):162-167. doi:10.51271/JDSE-0093

Read: 5
Download : 1
Cited: 0
_Footer