Skip to main content
. 2013 Mar 28;2013(3):CD003878. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003878.pub5

Comparison 4. Occlusal versus non‐occlusal loading.

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Patients with prosthesis failures 2 88 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.0 [0.31, 3.22]
2 Patients with implant failures 2 88 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.0 [0.31, 3.22]
3 Marginal bone level changes 2 78 Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.03 [‐0.10, 0.15]