13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The current use of patient-centered/reported outcomes in implant dentistry: a systematic review

      1 , 2 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 3
      Clinical Oral Implants Research
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          To provide an update on the use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in the field of implant dentistry (1); to compare PROMs for prostheses supported by one or more implants to alternative treatment options or a healthy dentition (2).

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Success criteria in implant dentistry: a systematic review.

          The purpose of this study was to examine the most frequently used criteria to define treatment success in implant dentistry. An electronic MEDLINE/PubMED search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials and prospective studies reporting on outcomes of implant dentistry. Only studies conducted with roughened surface implants and at least five-year follow-up were included. Data were analyzed for success at the implant level, peri-implant soft tissue, prosthetics, and patient satisfaction. Most frequently reported criteria for success at the implant level were mobility, pain, radiolucency, and peri-implant bone loss (> 1.5 mm), and for success at the peri-implant soft-tissue level, suppuration, and bleeding. The criteria for success at the prosthetic level were the occurrence of technical complications/prosthetic maintenance, adequate function, and esthetics during the five-year period. The criteria at patient satisfaction level were discomfort and paresthesia, satisfaction with appearance, and ability to chew/taste. Success in implant dentistry should ideally evaluate a long-term primary outcome of an implant-prosthetic complex as a whole.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures.

            Implant overdentures and conventional prostheses have been compared in several trials using a variety of functional and oral health-related quality of life (OHQOL) outcomes. In this paper, we describe the impact of implant overdentures on general and OHQOL in seniors. To compare the oral health-related and general quality of life of seniors (aged 65-75 years) who received either mandibular implant overdentures or conventional dentures. Sixty edentulous patients were recruited. Thirty received mandibular overdentures retained by two implants (IOD) and a conventional maxillary denture, the other 30 subjects received new maxillary and mandibular conventional complete dentures (CD). All completed the 20-item version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-20) before treatment, then at two and 6 months after delivery of the dentures. The SF-36 general health questionnaire was completed at baseline and 6 months only. Pretreatment and 6-month data from 55 subjects were analyzed. Those who received the IODs had significantly better OHIP-20 total scores at 6 months. Results for IOD subjects were also superior in the functional limitation, physical pain, physical disability and psychological disability subscales. While no significant between group difference was found on the SF-36 health survey, significant pre-post-treatment differences within the IOD group were detected for the role emotional, vitality and the social function scales. Mandibular overdentures retained by two implants provide elderly patients with better OHQOL. General health-related quality of life improved in the implant group.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Patients' satisfaction following implant therapy. A 10-year prospective cohort study.

              To analyse the patients' perception of implant therapy, 10 years following installation of titanium oral implants. As a part of a prospective cohort study of patients with ITI(R) dental implants, 104 patients were recruited to answer a questionnaire with 13 statements on the subjective perception of implant treatment, 5-15 years after implant installation (mean: 10.2 years). In addition, the patients were asked to mark a visual analogue scale (VAS) in which 0 indicated "total discontent" and 100 "total satisfaction" with the statements mentioned in the questionnaire. Results from the qualified questions answered were then compared with those obtained from VAS analysis. One hundred and four patients, with 214 installed oral implants participated. Forty-eight percent of the implants were reconstructed with single crowns and 52% with fixed partial dentures (FPD). The cumulative survival rate of the implants at 10 years was 93%. Two of the statements addressing function and chewing comfort yielded very high patient satisfaction (97% highly satisfied or satisfied, mean VAS: 94+/-13). Comparing chewing comfort for teeth or implants, respectively, 72.1% perceived no difference between the two, 17.3% felt more secure when masticating on teeth and 7.7% when masticating on implants (mean VAS: 54+/-24). The vast majority (96%, mean VAS: 96+/-10) was highly satisfied or satisfied with phonetic function and with aesthetics (97%, mean VAS: 93+/-13). A great majority of the patients (93%, mean VAS: 89+/-19) had no problems with cleansing the implant reconstruction. Indeed, one-third (37%, mean VAS: 55+/-27) indicated more ease to clean implants than to clean teeth. About half of the patients (47%) had noticed bleeding of the mucosa or the gingiva following brushing. In addition, half (47%) of those noticing bleeding felt that bleeding was less marked around implants than around teeth. Again, the vast majority of patients (92%, mean VAS: 92+/-14) indicated complete fulfilment of the treatment, i.e. the outcome satisfied their expectations. The same majority (94%, mean VAS: 93+/-17) would be willing to undergo the same treatment again, and (89%, mean VAS: 93+/-16) would even recommend such treatment to friends and relatives, if indicated. The cost for implant therapy was deemed to be reasonable to a large extent (87%, mean VAS: 85+/-20). Using oral implants, more than 90% of the patients were completely satisfied with implant therapy, both from a functional and aesthetic point of view. The costs associated with implant therapy were considered to be justified. This was determined by both qualified questions and the use of VAS after 10 years of function.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clinical Oral Implants Research
                Clin. Oral Impl. Res.
                Wiley
                09057161
                September 2015
                September 2015
                September 09 2015
                : 26
                : 45-56
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology; Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences; Dental School; Ghent University; Ghent Belgium
                [2 ]Department of Prosthodontics; Faculty of Odontology; Malmö University; Malmö Sweden
                [3 ]Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology; Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy; Dental Medicine; Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB); Brussels Belgium
                Article
                10.1111/clr.12634
                26385620
                c4f3e951-e252-4698-9f68-97750864d95f
                © 2015

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article