Paolo Cerone
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Paolo Cerone has a total of 6 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Bruna Sinjari
Unit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University “G. d’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
1 shared publication - Edit Xhajanka
Department of Prostethic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Medical University of Tirana, 1001 Tirana, Albania
1 shared publication - Gianmaria D’ Addazio
Unit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University “G. d’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
1 shared publication - Imena Rexhepi
Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University “G. D’Annunzio” Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
1 shared publication - Manlio Santilli
Unit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University “G. d’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
1 shared publication - Sergio Caputi
Unit of Prosthodontics, Department of Innovative Technologies in Medicine and Dentistry, University “G. d’Annunzio” Chieti-Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 27 October 2021
- Published by MDPI AG in Prosthesis
- Vol. 3 (4) , 361-369
Traditional Removable Partial Dentures versus Implant-Supported Removable Partial Dentures: A Retrospective, Observational Oral Health-Related Quality-of-Life Study
Removable partial dentures (RPD) are still a valid alternative for the restoration of missing teeth. Additionally, implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPD) represent a valid alternative as it allows to avoid the use of clasps and increase stability. The objective of this study was to evaluate through an OHIP-14 questionnaire the level of satisfaction and quality of life (QoL) of patients treated before RPD and then with ISRPD. Twenty patients were rehabilitated with traditional RPDs, and after one year the prosthesis was modified into ISRPD, by inserting an implant and a ball or locator attachment. At the end of both phases, patients completed the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) questionnaire. The collected data were statistically analyzed through the Wilcoxon U test, as overall OHIP score and difference between treatments. The mean of the OHIP summary (range from 0 to 56) in the RPD Group was 20.95 (±5.27). In the ISRPD Group it was 13.95 (±3.91), with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between the two Groups. The same findings were highlighted for the differences between groups in every domain question. Patients showed significant improvements after rehabilitation in all areas of investigation, stating how the transformation of a removable prosthesis into an implant-supported one can improve patients’ QoL with benefits in chewing ability, aesthetics and self-satisfaction.
- 27 October 2021
- Published by MDPI AG in Prosthesis
- Vol. 3 (4) , 361-369
Open AccessTraditional Removable Partial Dentures versus Implant-Supported Removable Partial Dentures: A Retrospective, Observational Oral Health-Related Quality-of-Life Study
Removable partial dentures (RPD) are still a valid alternative for the restoration of missing teeth. Additionally, implant-supported removable partial dentures (ISRPD) represent a valid alternative as it allows to avoid the use of clasps and increase stability. The objective of this study was to evaluate through an OHIP-14 questionnaire the level of satisfaction and quality of life (QoL) of patients treated before RPD and then with ISRPD. Twenty patients were rehabilitated with traditional RPDs, and after one year the prosthesis was modified into ISRPD, by inserting an implant and a ball or locator attachment. At the end of both phases, patients completed the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) questionnaire. The collected data were statistically analyzed through the Wilcoxon U test, as overall OHIP score and difference between treatments. The mean of the OHIP summary (range from 0 to 56) in the RPD Group was 20.95 (±5.27). In the ISRPD Group it was 13.95 (±3.91), with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between the two Groups. The same findings were highlighted for the differences between groups in every domain question. Patients showed significant improvements after rehabilitation in all areas of investigation, stating how the transformation of a removable prosthesis into an implant-supported one can improve patients’ QoL with benefits in chewing ability, aesthetics and self-satisfaction.