Advanced search
1 file | 173.74 KB

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

Hugo De Bruyn (UGent) , Stefanie Raes (UGent) , Carine Matthys (UGent) and Jan Cosyn (UGent)
(2015) CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH. 26(suppl. 11). p.45-56
Author
Organization
Abstract
Aim: 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). Materials and methods: The dental literature was searched on PubMed until December 31, 2014, using a general search algorithm. An overall quantitative analysis was performed, and a qualitative appraisal was made on the output of the last 6 years. Per type of edentulism and prosthetic treatment, the general search algorithm was refined in order to select controlled studies comparing PROMs for prostheses supported by one or more implants to alternative treatment options or a healthy dentition. Results: With nearly half of the output (300 of 635) published in the last 6 years, there is a growing interest in PROMs by the scientific community. When scrutinizing the 300 most recent publications, only 84 controlled studies could be identified among which 38 RCTs and 31 cohort studies. An "ad hoc" approach is commonly employed using non-standardized questions and different scoring methods, which may compromise validity and reliability. Overall, 39 eligible papers related to fully edentulous patients treated with an implant overdenture (IOD) and 9 to fully edentulous patients treated with a fixed implant prosthesis (FIP). There is plenty of evidence from well-controlled studies showing that fully edentulous patients in the mandible experience higher satisfaction with an IOD when compared to a conventional denture (CD). This may not hold true for fully edentulous patients in the maxilla. In general, fully edentulous patients seem to opt for a fixed or removable rehabilitation on implants for specific reasons. Data pertaining to partially edentulous patients were limited (FIP: n = 6; single implants: n = 16). In these patients, the timing of implant placement does not seem to affect patient satisfaction. Patients seem to prefer straightforward implant surgery over complex surgery that includes bone grafting. Conclusion: There is an urgent need for standardized reporting of PROMs in the field of implant dentistry. Fully edentulous patients in the mandible experience higher satisfaction with an IOD when compared to a CD. All other types of prostheses have been underexposed to research.
Keywords
dental implants, patient satisfaction, patient-centered, patient-reported outcomes, quality of life, QUALITY-OF-LIFE, RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIAL, RETAINED MANDIBULAR OVERDENTURES, SINGLE-TOOTH IMPLANTS, WITHIN-SUBJECT COMPARISONS, CONVENTIONAL COMPLETE DENTURES, DIFFERENT ATTACHMENT SYSTEMS, 4 ENDOSSEOUS IMPLANTS, FOLLOW-UP, SUPPORTED RESTORATIONS

Downloads

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

Citation

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

Chicago
De Bruyn, Hugo, Stefanie Raes, Carine Matthys, and Jan Cosyn. 2015. “The Current Use of Patient-centered/reported Outcomes in Implant Dentistry : a Systematic Review.” Clinical Oral Implants Research 26 (suppl. 11): 45–56.
APA
De Bruyn, H., Raes, S., Matthys, C., & Cosyn, J. (2015). The current use of patient-centered/reported outcomes in implant dentistry : a systematic review. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 26(suppl. 11), 45–56. Presented at the 4th Consensus conference of the European Association for Osseointegration (EAO).
Vancouver
1.
De Bruyn H, Raes S, Matthys C, Cosyn J. The current use of patient-centered/reported outcomes in implant dentistry : a systematic review. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH. 2015;26(suppl. 11):45–56.
MLA
De Bruyn, Hugo, Stefanie Raes, Carine Matthys, et al. “The Current Use of Patient-centered/reported Outcomes in Implant Dentistry : a Systematic Review.” CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH 26.suppl. 11 (2015): 45–56. Print.
@article{8506134,
  abstract     = {Aim: 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). 
Materials and methods: The dental literature was searched on PubMed until December 31, 2014, using a general search algorithm. An overall quantitative analysis was performed, and a qualitative appraisal was made on the output of the last 6 years. Per type of edentulism and prosthetic treatment, the general search algorithm was refined in order to select controlled studies comparing PROMs for prostheses supported by one or more implants to alternative treatment options or a healthy dentition. 
Results: With nearly half of the output (300 of 635) published in the last 6 years, there is a growing interest in PROMs by the scientific community. When scrutinizing the 300 most recent publications, only 84 controlled studies could be identified among which 38 RCTs and 31 cohort studies. An {\textacutedbl}ad hoc{\textacutedbl} approach is commonly employed using non-standardized questions and different scoring methods, which may compromise validity and reliability. Overall, 39 eligible papers related to fully edentulous patients treated with an implant overdenture (IOD) and 9 to fully edentulous patients treated with a fixed implant prosthesis (FIP). There is plenty of evidence from well-controlled studies showing that fully edentulous patients in the mandible experience higher satisfaction with an IOD when compared to a conventional denture (CD). This may not hold true for fully edentulous patients in the maxilla. In general, fully edentulous patients seem to opt for a fixed or removable rehabilitation on implants for specific reasons. Data pertaining to partially edentulous patients were limited (FIP: n = 6; single implants: n = 16). In these patients, the timing of implant placement does not seem to affect patient satisfaction. Patients seem to prefer straightforward implant surgery over complex surgery that includes bone grafting. 
Conclusion: There is an urgent need for standardized reporting of PROMs in the field of implant dentistry. Fully edentulous patients in the mandible experience higher satisfaction with an IOD when compared to a CD. All other types of prostheses have been underexposed to research.},
  author       = {De Bruyn, Hugo and Raes, Stefanie and Matthys, Carine and Cosyn, Jan},
  issn         = {0905-7161},
  journal      = {CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH},
  keyword      = {dental implants,patient satisfaction,patient-centered,patient-reported outcomes,quality of life,QUALITY-OF-LIFE,RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIAL,RETAINED MANDIBULAR OVERDENTURES,SINGLE-TOOTH IMPLANTS,WITHIN-SUBJECT COMPARISONS,CONVENTIONAL COMPLETE DENTURES,DIFFERENT ATTACHMENT SYSTEMS,4 ENDOSSEOUS IMPLANTS,FOLLOW-UP,SUPPORTED RESTORATIONS},
  language     = {eng},
  location     = {Pfaffikon, Switzerland},
  number       = {suppl. 11},
  pages        = {45--56},
  title        = {The current use of patient-centered/reported outcomes in implant dentistry : a systematic review},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.12634},
  volume       = {26},
  year         = {2015},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: