Dynamic vs. Static Jaw Relations in Implant-Supported Prostheses: Chewing Efficiency

This study aims to compare the chewing efficiency of implant-supported full-arch prostheses fabricated using two different jaw relation registration techniques: conventional static jaw relation registration and dynamic jaw tracking. Ten completely edentulous patients will be recruited from the Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University. Each participant will receive implant-supported full-arch prosthetic rehabilitation according to the All-on-6 concept. Two definitive zirconia prostheses will be fabricated for each participant, one using conventional static jaw relation records and the other using dynamic jaw tracking records, in a crossover study design. Chewing efficiency will be evaluated using a two-color chewing gum mixing test at the time of definitive prosthesis insertion, three months after insertion, and six months after insertion. The degree of color mixing will be analyzed using dedicated image-analysis software. The study will investigate whether dynamic jaw relation registration provides different chewing efficiency outcomes compared with the conventional static technique in patients rehabilitated with implant-supported full-arch prostheses.

\*\*Inclusion Criteria\*\* 1. Completely edentulous patients with fully healed residual alveolar ridges. 2. Angle's Class I maxillomandibular relationship. 3. Sufficient maxillary and mandibular restorative space, with a minimum of 15 mm, assessed using a tentative jaw relation record. 4. Adequate bone height in the premaxillary region and anterior mandible, confirmed radiographically. 5. Ability to understand the study procedures and provide written informed consent. \*\*Exclusion Criteria\*\* 1. Systemic disorders affecting bone metabolism or healing, including uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and osteoporosis. 2. Local or systemic contraindications to implant surgery. 3. History of chemotherapy or radiotherapy to the head and neck region. 4. Poor neuromuscular coordination. 5. Temporomandibular joint dysfunction . 6. Parafunctional habits.