Abstract
Background Loss of teeth has a negative influence on essential oral functions. It is important to understand edentulous patients' perceptions about the impacts of treatment options on their oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and satisfaction. Aims To appraise the systematic reviews (with/without meta-analysis) that investigate the impacts of complete conventional dentures (CCDs) and/or implant-retained overdentures (IRODs) on the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and satisfaction among edentulous patients. Methods The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for conduct of an umbrella systematic review was followed. Three database systems were used: Medline, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library. PROSPERO was searched for ongoing or recently completed systematic reviews. The reviews must report OHRQoL and patients' satisfaction as outcomes. Results A total of eight reviews were included in data synthesis (six were systematic reviews without meta-analysis, one was systematic review with meta-analysis, and one was meta-analysis). The level of evidence of all included reviews based on the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network ranged between 1+ and 1-. Conclusion The results of this umbrella systematic review demonstrate the superiority of using IRODs compared with CCDs on the OHRQoL and patients' satisfaction outcomes. However, this positive impact is more accentuated when patients demand implant treatment or cannot adapt to CCDs treatment. Financial factors and adaptive capability indeed affect patient tolerance to both treatment modalities.