No registrations found.
ID
Source
Health condition
retention system of implant supported ear prosthesis
Oorprothese met steg/clipretentie vs. magneetretentie
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
Patient's preference for either the bar/clip retained ear prosthesis or the magnet-retained ear prosthesis
Secondary outcome
Prosthesishygiene
Background summary
In this study, we want to compare the present bar-clip retained ear prosthesis to a magnet-retained ear prosthesis. Special emphasis thereby is made to the satisfaction of the patient with the different systems and the condition of the peri-implant tissue. Also, the technical aspects of the prosthesis will be compared and evaluated.
Study objective
A magnet-retained ear prosthesis is equally or more satisfactory compared to a bar/clip retained ear prosthesis
Study design
Enquete before the manufacturing of the prosthesis and 6-weeks after placing the prosthesis.
Intervention
New ear prosthesis with magnetic retention instead of bar/clip retention
Afdeling Mondziekten, Kaak- en Aangezichtschirurgie <br>
Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen <br>
Postbus 30.001, BB70 <br>
9700 RB Groningen
A. Linde
Groningen
The Netherlands
050-3612798
a.linde@umcg.nl
Afdeling Mondziekten, Kaak- en Aangezichtschirurgie <br>
Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen <br>
Postbus 30.001, BB70 <br>
9700 RB Groningen
A. Linde
Groningen
The Netherlands
050-3612798
a.linde@umcg.nl
Inclusion criteria
Bar/clip retained ear prosthesis
Exclusion criteria
None
Design
Recruitment
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
No registrations found.
In other registers
| Register | ID |
|---|---|
| NTR-new | NL4481 |
| NTR-old | NTR4614 |
| Other | : |