ObjectivesTo compare one- vs two-step impression procedures for the provision of conventional complete dentures (CCDs) for edentulous individuals with severe mandibular resorption, in terms of (1) masticatory performance and ability; (2) satisfaction with mandibular CCDs; and (3) post-delivery adjustments. MethodsFifty-two patients requiring maxillary + mandibular CCDs were randomly divided into two parallel arms according to the impression method of the mandibular ridge: (SI) single impression with stock trays (irreversible hydrocolloid); (TI) two-step impression in custom trays, with border molding (impression compound) followed by the impression itself (polyether). Mastication performance was evaluated by a colorimetric test, whereas patients answered questions on masticatory ability and satisfaction with mandibular CCDs (100-mm visual analogue scale). The number of post-delivery sessions for adjustments were also quantified. Outcomes were assessed at 3 and 6 months after delivery. ResultsThe masticatory performance was similar for both groups, regardless of time (3 months, P = 0.62; 6 months, P = 0.61). No significant difference was found for patient-reported (P > 0.05), i.e. masticatory ability (general ease of chewing and quality of grinding food; ability to chew specific foods), general satisfaction with the mandibular CCD (general satisfaction, comfort, aesthetics, ability to speak and to perform correct cleaning, retention and stability). Both methods resulted in a similar number of post-delivery adjustment sessions [SI: 3.8 (1.7); TI: 3.2 (1.4); P = 0.09]. ConclusionsCompared to a traditional approach, CCDs obtained from a single impression achieve similar masticatory performance/ability and patient satisfaction, even in patients with severely reabsorbed mandibular ridge. Both methods demand the same amount of post-delivery adjustment. Clinical significanceA simplified impression technique which eliminates the secondary impression can provide CCDs of good clinical quality, which influences the OHRQoL, and satisfaction in the same extent they would by a two-step procedure, even for patients with severely reabsorbed mandibular ridges (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02339194).