Advanced search
1 file | 108.30 KB Add to list

An analysis of the decision-making process for single implant treatment in general practice

Jan Cosyn (UGent) , Stefanie Raes (UGent) , Stefanie De Meyer (UGent) , Filiep Raes (UGent) , Ronald Buyl, Danny Coomans and Hugo De Bruyn (UGent)
Author
Organization
Abstract
Purpose: To study the frequency of and factors associated with the decision to perform single implant treatment after tooth extraction by general practitioners in a private, fee-for-service setting. Material and methods: One hundred practitioners with a general dental practice in Ghent were randomly selected. Clinicians were asked to fill in a study form for every single extraction they performed during an 8-week period. The form related to the treatment decision and a number of patient- and clinician-related factors. Results: Ninety-four general dentists (52 males, 42 females; mean age 49; range 24 – 68) agreed to participate and extracted 1180 single teeth. After exclusion of third molars and cases where the reason for tooth loss would generally prohibit replacement, 900 cases were identified. In 24 % of these patients there was no treatment decision and in 18 % replacement was deemed unnecessary. When replacement was necessary (n = 526), removable partial denture (RPD), fixed partial denture (FPD), single implant treatment and resin-bonded bridge were chosen in 54 %, 24 %, 21 % and 1 % of the patients, respectively. Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate the decision-making process for single implant treatment against RPD and FPD. In relation to RPD, single implant treatment was more likely in highly educated patients with few missing teeth and no bone loss at adjacent teeth. In relation to FPD, single implant treatment was more likely in patients with intact adjacent teeth and when the tooth was extracted by a female dentist. Experience in implant prosthetics was positively associated with single implant treatment in all analyses. Conclusions: Single implant treatment is not the most common procedure in daily practice to restore a single tooth gap. Patient’s education, oral factors and clinician-related factors may affect the decision-making process, whereas medical factors may not.
Keywords
single tooth, dental implant, general practice, Extraction, decision-making, OSSEOINTEGRATED IMPLANTS, SWEDISH POPULATION, NEED, EXTRACTION, DENTISTS

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 108.30 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Cosyn, Jan, Stefanie Raes, Stefanie De Meyer, et al. “An Analysis of the Decision-making Process for Single Implant Treatment in General Practice.” JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY 39.2 (2012): 166–172. Print.
APA
Cosyn, J., Raes, S., De Meyer, S., Raes, F., Buyl, R., Coomans, D., & De Bruyn, H. (2012). An analysis of the decision-making process for single implant treatment in general practice. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 39(2), 166–172.
Chicago author-date
Cosyn, Jan, Stefanie Raes, Stefanie De Meyer, Filiep Raes, Ronald Buyl, Danny Coomans, and Hugo De Bruyn. 2012. “An Analysis of the Decision-making Process for Single Implant Treatment in General Practice.” Journal of Clinical Periodontology 39 (2): 166–172.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Cosyn, Jan, Stefanie Raes, Stefanie De Meyer, Filiep Raes, Ronald Buyl, Danny Coomans, and Hugo De Bruyn. 2012. “An Analysis of the Decision-making Process for Single Implant Treatment in General Practice.” Journal of Clinical Periodontology 39 (2): 166–172.
Vancouver
1.
Cosyn J, Raes S, De Meyer S, Raes F, Buyl R, Coomans D, et al. An analysis of the decision-making process for single implant treatment in general practice. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY. 2012;39(2):166–72.
IEEE
[1]
J. Cosyn et al., “An analysis of the decision-making process for single implant treatment in general practice,” JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 166–172, 2012.
@article{1905198,
  abstract     = {Purpose: To study the frequency of and factors associated with the decision to perform single implant treatment after tooth extraction by general practitioners in a private, fee-for-service setting.
Material and methods: One hundred practitioners with a general dental practice in Ghent were randomly selected. Clinicians were asked to fill in a study form for every single extraction they performed during an 8-week period. The form related to the treatment decision and a number of patient- and clinician-related factors.
Results: Ninety-four general dentists (52 males, 42 females; mean age 49; range 24 – 68) agreed to participate and extracted 1180 single teeth. After exclusion of third molars and cases where the reason for tooth loss would generally prohibit replacement, 900 cases were identified. In 24 % of these patients there was no treatment decision and in 18 % replacement was deemed unnecessary. When replacement was necessary (n = 526), removable partial denture (RPD), fixed partial denture (FPD), single implant treatment and resin-bonded bridge were chosen in 54 %, 24 %, 21 % and 1 % of the patients, respectively. Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate the decision-making process for single implant treatment against RPD and FPD. In relation to RPD, single implant treatment was more likely in highly educated patients with few missing teeth and no bone loss at adjacent teeth. In relation to FPD, single implant treatment was more likely in patients with intact adjacent teeth and when the tooth was extracted by a female dentist. Experience in implant prosthetics was positively associated with single implant treatment in all analyses.
Conclusions: Single implant treatment is not the most common procedure in daily practice to restore a single tooth gap. Patient’s education, oral factors and clinician-related factors may affect the decision-making process, whereas medical factors may not.},
  author       = {Cosyn, Jan and Raes, Stefanie and De Meyer, Stefanie and Raes, Filiep and Buyl, Ronald and Coomans, Danny and De Bruyn, Hugo},
  issn         = {0303-6979},
  journal      = {JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY},
  keywords     = {single tooth,dental implant,general practice,Extraction,decision-making,OSSEOINTEGRATED IMPLANTS,SWEDISH POPULATION,NEED,EXTRACTION,DENTISTS},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {166--172},
  title        = {An analysis of the decision-making process for single implant treatment in general practice},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01804.x},
  volume       = {39},
  year         = {2012},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: