Patient’s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry: A systematic review

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Patient’s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry : A systematic review. / Gotfredsen, Klaus; Hosseini, Mandana; Rimborg, Susie; Özhayat, Esben.

I: Clinical Oral Implants Research, Bind 32, Nr. S21, 2021, s. 67-84.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Gotfredsen, K, Hosseini, M, Rimborg, S & Özhayat, E 2021, 'Patient’s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry: A systematic review', Clinical Oral Implants Research, bind 32, nr. S21, s. 67-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13861

APA

Gotfredsen, K., Hosseini, M., Rimborg, S., & Özhayat, E. (2021). Patient’s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry: A systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 32(S21), 67-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13861

Vancouver

Gotfredsen K, Hosseini M, Rimborg S, Özhayat E. Patient’s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry: A systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2021;32(S21):67-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13861

Author

Gotfredsen, Klaus ; Hosseini, Mandana ; Rimborg, Susie ; Özhayat, Esben. / Patient’s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry : A systematic review. I: Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2021 ; Bind 32, Nr. S21. s. 67-84.

Bibtex

@article{06cc7db845dc40c7b9129bfa47e5243d,
title = "Patient{\textquoteright}s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry: A systematic review",
abstract = "Protocols for implant dentistry, most frequently include periods until healing of the extraction sockets and osseointegration of the implant. Deductional thinking imply that patients would prefer if treatment time in implant dentistry were reduced. Aim: What is the patient perception of immediate or early implant placement or loading in comparison with traditional, delayed placement, and/or loading assessed by patient-reported outcome measures, as evidenced in randomized controlled clinical trials or prospective controlled studies?. Material and methods: A systematic review was performed following the PRISMA guidelines with a literature search up to June 30. All hits were imported into Rayyan online software and analyzed by two authors for eligibility. Cochrane RoB2.0 and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate risk of bias in the individual studies. Results: Of the initially 1439 articles, 76 underwent full-text analysis and finally 40 articles, representing 35 cohort studies, were included. The quality evaluation demonstrated some concerns among most of the studies. Conclusion: a) There is no strong evidence to support that the time for implant placement or loading of implant-supported single or short-span reconstructions or overdentures influence patients´ discomfort, satisfaction with function or esthetics or overall satisfaction with the implant treatment. b) There is some evidence that studies including edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported full-arch FDPs demonstrate more satisfied patients with immediate than for the early or delayed loaded implant reconstructions after short time, but the difference is not clear one year after treatment.",
keywords = "immediate loading, immediate placement, patient-reported outcome measures",
author = "Klaus Gotfredsen and Mandana Hosseini and Susie Rimborg and Esben {\"O}zhayat",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd; The 6th EAO Consensus Conference ; Conference date: 10-02-2021 Through 12-02-2021",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.1111/clr.13861",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "67--84",
journal = "Clinical Oral Implants Research",
issn = "0905-7161",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "S21",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patient’s perception of timing concepts in implant dentistry

T2 - The 6th EAO Consensus Conference

AU - Gotfredsen, Klaus

AU - Hosseini, Mandana

AU - Rimborg, Susie

AU - Özhayat, Esben

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Protocols for implant dentistry, most frequently include periods until healing of the extraction sockets and osseointegration of the implant. Deductional thinking imply that patients would prefer if treatment time in implant dentistry were reduced. Aim: What is the patient perception of immediate or early implant placement or loading in comparison with traditional, delayed placement, and/or loading assessed by patient-reported outcome measures, as evidenced in randomized controlled clinical trials or prospective controlled studies?. Material and methods: A systematic review was performed following the PRISMA guidelines with a literature search up to June 30. All hits were imported into Rayyan online software and analyzed by two authors for eligibility. Cochrane RoB2.0 and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate risk of bias in the individual studies. Results: Of the initially 1439 articles, 76 underwent full-text analysis and finally 40 articles, representing 35 cohort studies, were included. The quality evaluation demonstrated some concerns among most of the studies. Conclusion: a) There is no strong evidence to support that the time for implant placement or loading of implant-supported single or short-span reconstructions or overdentures influence patients´ discomfort, satisfaction with function or esthetics or overall satisfaction with the implant treatment. b) There is some evidence that studies including edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported full-arch FDPs demonstrate more satisfied patients with immediate than for the early or delayed loaded implant reconstructions after short time, but the difference is not clear one year after treatment.

AB - Protocols for implant dentistry, most frequently include periods until healing of the extraction sockets and osseointegration of the implant. Deductional thinking imply that patients would prefer if treatment time in implant dentistry were reduced. Aim: What is the patient perception of immediate or early implant placement or loading in comparison with traditional, delayed placement, and/or loading assessed by patient-reported outcome measures, as evidenced in randomized controlled clinical trials or prospective controlled studies?. Material and methods: A systematic review was performed following the PRISMA guidelines with a literature search up to June 30. All hits were imported into Rayyan online software and analyzed by two authors for eligibility. Cochrane RoB2.0 and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate risk of bias in the individual studies. Results: Of the initially 1439 articles, 76 underwent full-text analysis and finally 40 articles, representing 35 cohort studies, were included. The quality evaluation demonstrated some concerns among most of the studies. Conclusion: a) There is no strong evidence to support that the time for implant placement or loading of implant-supported single or short-span reconstructions or overdentures influence patients´ discomfort, satisfaction with function or esthetics or overall satisfaction with the implant treatment. b) There is some evidence that studies including edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported full-arch FDPs demonstrate more satisfied patients with immediate than for the early or delayed loaded implant reconstructions after short time, but the difference is not clear one year after treatment.

KW - immediate loading

KW - immediate placement

KW - patient-reported outcome measures

U2 - 10.1111/clr.13861

DO - 10.1111/clr.13861

M3 - Review

C2 - 34642992

AN - SCOPUS:85116905358

VL - 32

SP - 67

EP - 84

JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research

JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research

SN - 0905-7161

IS - S21

Y2 - 10 February 2021 through 12 February 2021

ER -

ID: 285521769