Patient-reported outcome measures focusing on aesthetics of implant- and tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wittneben, Julia; Wismeijer, Daniel; Brägger, Urs; Joda, Tim Alexander; Abou-Ayash, Samir (2018). Patient-reported outcome measures focusing on aesthetics of implant- and tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical oral implants research, 29(S16), pp. 224-240. Wiley-Blackwell 10.1111/clr.13295

[img]
Preview
Text
Wittneben_et_al-2018-Clinical_Oral_Implants_Research.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial (CC-BY-NC).

Download (1MB) | Preview

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the existing evidence on patient-reported aesthetic outcome measures (PROMs) of implant-supported, relative to tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In April 2017, two reviewers independently searched the Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane electronic databases, focusing on studies including patient-reported aesthetic outcomes of implant- and tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Human studies with a mean follow-up period of at least 1 year, a minimum of ten patients, and English, German, or French publication were included. For the comparison of subgroups, random-effects meta-regression for aggregate-level data was used.

RESULTS

The systematic search for implant-supported prostheses focusing on patient-reported outcomes identified 2,675 titles, which were screened by two independent authors. Fifty full-text articles were analyzed, and finally, 16 publications (including 19 relevant study cohorts) were included. For tooth-supported prostheses, no studies could be included. A total of 816 implant-supported reconstructions were analyzed by patients. Overall aesthetic evaluation by the patients' visual analogue scale (VAS) rating was high in implant-supported FDPs (median: 90.3; min-max: 80.0-94.0) and the surrounding mucosa (median: 84.7; min-max: 73.0-92.0). Individual restorative materials, implant neck design (i.e., tissue or bone level type implants), and the use of a fixed provisional had no effect on patients' ratings of the definitive implant-supported FDPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Aesthetics is an important patient-reported measure, which lacks in standardized methods; however, patients' satisfaction was high for implant-supported FDPs and the surrounding mucosa.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine > Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology

UniBE Contributor:

Wittneben, Julia; Brägger, Urs; Joda, Tim Alexander and Abou-Ayash, Samir

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

0905-7161

Publisher:

Wiley-Blackwell

Language:

English

Submitter:

Vanda Kummer

Date Deposited:

07 Mar 2019 17:23

Last Modified:

26 Oct 2019 22:25

Publisher DOI:

10.1111/clr.13295

PubMed ID:

30328183

Uncontrolled Keywords:

FDP Mucosa PROM PROMS VAS esthetic implant implant-supported crown patient-centered outcomes patient-reported outcomes

BORIS DOI:

10.7892/boris.123976

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/123976

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback