التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
| العنوان: |
Single and partial tooth replacement with fixed dental prostheses supported by dental implants: A systematic review of outcomes and outcome measures used in clinical trials in the last 10 years. |
| المؤلفون: |
Sailer, Irena1, Barbato, Luigi2, Mojon, Philippe1, Pagliaro, Umberto2, Serni, Lapo2, Karasan, Duygu1, Cairo, Francesco2 francesco.cairo@unifi.it |
| المصدر: |
Journal of Clinical Periodontology. May2023 Supplement 1, Vol. 50, p22-37. 16p. 1 Diagram, 7 Charts, 3 Graphs. |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: |
*DENTAL implants, *DENTURES, *MEDICAL information storage & retrieval systems, *SYSTEMATIC reviews, *BONE resorption, *PERIODONTITIS, *HEALTH outcome assessment, *COSMETIC dentistry, *TREATMENT effectiveness, *DENTAL fillings, *MEDLINE, *BONE density, *PARTIAL dentures, *EVALUATION |
| مستخلص: |
Aim: To evaluate outcome measures, methods of assessment, and analysis in clinical studies on fixed single‐ and multiple‐unit implant restorations. Materials and Methods: Three independent electronic database searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane) were done to identify prospective and retrospective clinical studies published from January 2011 up to June 2021 with ≥20 patients and minimum 1‐year follow‐up period on technical and clinical outcomes of implant‐supported single crowns (SCs) and partial fixed dental prostheses (P‐FDPs). An entire data extraction was performed to identify primarily the most reported outcome measures and later to define the choice of assessment methods of those outcome measures. The outcomes were analysed descriptively, and the strength of association was evaluated using the Pearson chi‐square test (p ≤.05). Results: In a total 531 studies, 368 on SCs (69.3%), 70 on P‐FDPs (13.1%), and 93 on both restoration types (17.5%) were included; 56.3% of all studies did not clearly define a primary outcome. The most frequent primary outcome was marginal bone level (MBL) (55.2%) followed by implant survival (5.3%), professional aesthetic evaluation (3.4%), and technical complications (2.1%). Peri‐implant indices were the most reported secondary outcome (55.1%), followed by implant survival (39.9%), MBL (36%), and implant success (26.4%). Prosthetic failure (seven studies [3.9%]) was one of the least reported outcome measures. Conclusions: Outcome measures and their assessment methods showed high heterogeneity among studies. Primary outcomes were not often defined clearly, and the most frequently selected primary outcome was marginal bone loss. Prosthetic outcomes, implant survival, and patient‐related outcomes were only infrequently reported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| قاعدة البيانات: |
Academic Search Index |
