{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019230769230769232, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.690476190476191, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Locator versus Ball and Socket Attachment Systems for Single Implant Retained Mandibular Overdenture (Retention -Oral health related quality of life)

Aim: It was to compare Locator versus ball and socket attachment systems for single implant retained mandibular overdenture in relation to retention and oral health related quality of life. Subjects and Methods: Twenty completely edentulous patients were randomly selected from the Outpatient Clinic.  Patients were divided into two groups, group (I) received single implant retained overdenture with ball and socket attachment while group (II) received single implant retained overdenture with locator attachment. Retention was measured three months interval after overdenture insertion for one year using force gauge device. Oral healthrelated quality of life was evaluated using OHIP-EDENT questionnaire after one year of overdenture insertion. Results: Group (II) recorded higher retention values than group (I) and the difference was statistically  significant. Group I recorded higher Oral healthrelated quality of life mean values than group II and the difference was statistically non- significant.  Conclusion: Locator attachment significantly increases retention of implant retained overdenture than ball and socket attachment. There is no significant difference in Patient oral health and quality of life between locator and ball attachments.