Attitudes of general dental practitioners towards implant dentistry in an environment with widespread provision of implant therapy

Patient-reported outcomes following dental implant rehabilitation according to reason for missing teeth: A survey from a Norwegian population 8 years following treatment

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) 8 years after dental implant rehabilitation in a sample with tooth loss due to periodontitis (TLP) and a sample with missing teeth for other reasons (MTOR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Norwegian National Insurance Scheme registry of subsidized dental implant therapy was searched, and patients (n = 3083) rehabilitated with dental implants in 2014 were mailed a questionnaire. PROs were described by relative frequencies, and the TLP and MTOR subsamples were compared using chi-square test. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to investigate variables potentially predicting PROs.

RESULTS

Of the respondents (n = 1299), more than 90% were partly or fully satisfied with the treatment outcome. Complications were reported by 44.2%. Patients who lost teeth due to periodontitis (n = 784) reported greater oral function improvement and better pre-treatment information, and were more likely to experience complications when compared with patients who lost teeth for other reasons (n = 515). Age, level of education, self-funded cost, pre-treatment information, history of complications and the reason for missing teeth were found to predict PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

In a Norwegian population rehabilitated with dental implants in 2014, satisfaction with the treatment outcome and the aesthetic outcome was high, irrespective of the reason for missing teeth. Self-report of complications and lack of pre-treatment information were the strongest predictors of inferior patient satisfaction and also predicted inferior oral function.

The referral pattern and treatment modality for peri-implant disease between periodontists and non-periodontist dentists

OBJECTIVES

This study is to investigate the referral pattern and treatment modality of dentists in the management of peri-implant diseases between periodontists and non-periodontist dentists (NPDs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 167 validated questionnaires were obtained from periodontists and NPDs, who had experience of placing implants for at least one year. Question I to IV asked how the dentist would respond if a patient came for treatment of their peri-implant diseases with four different scenarios according to resource of patient and disease severity. For each Scenario, dentists also replied which treatment procedures they would use if they decide to treat the patient.

RESULTS

Periodontal training, resource of patient, and disease severity were shown to significantly influence the referral pattern and treatment modality in the management of peri-implant disease (p < 0.05). Periodontists were more likely to use variable treatment procedures, including occlusal adjustment (OR = 2.283, p < 0.01), oral hygiene instruction (OR = 3.751, p < 0.001), topical antiseptic agent (OR = 2.491, p < 0.005), non-surgical mechanical therapy (OR = 2.689, p < 0.001), surgical therapy (OR = 2.009, p < 0.01), and remove implant (OR = 3.486, p < 0.001) to treat peri-implant diseases, compared to NPDs.

CONCLUSION

The periodontal specialty training, resource of patient, and disease severity significantly influenced the referral pattern and treatment modality of dentist treating an implant diagnosed with peri-implant disease. This study also highlighted the importance of educating basic periodontal and peri-implant disease-related knowledge to all dentists regularly performing dental implant treatments.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Peri-implant diseases are highly prevalent among patients with dental implants. Periodontal specialty training could enhance using variable treatment procedures to treat peri-implant diseases for dentists.

Dentists' Attitudes Toward Dental Implant Maintenance in Thailand

INTRODUCTION

As implant therapy is a widely applied treatment modality, general dentists are in the frontline of maintaining health in patients with implants. It is however unknown to what extent general dentists are competent and feel prepared to deliver maintenance of implants to patients.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes and self-reported and objectively assessed competences of general dentists with maintenance of dental implants in patients.

METHODS

A questionnaire designed and validated for the purpose of the study, including attitudes and self-reported and objectively assessed competences, was distributed by means of an online platform.

RESULTS

Data from 429 questionnaires were included in the study. Half of the participants were 28 to 33 y old and 78% had been working <10 y. Seventy-eight percent believed that dental implant maintenance should be performed by general dentists, but only 51% were prepared to do this, citing obstacles such as insufficient knowledge and limitations of their working environment. The mean ± SD objectively assessed competence score was 8.97 ± 2.74 of 17. There were significant differences (P < 0.001, 1-way analysis of variance) in the scores among dentists who offered the full range of maintenance and management of complications (10.83 ± 2.45) with those willing to provide comprehensive oral examination and implant maintenance only (9.31 ± 2.73), those offering comprehensive examination but unwilling to conduct maintenance (8.22 ± 2.28), and those who refer all dental implant patients elsewhere (7.2 ± 2.66). Around half of the dentists believed that implants last for life.

CONCLUSIONS

While general dentists appeared to largely acknowledge the importance of providing implant maintenance care and present with positive attitudes, a large portion was unwilling to engage with maintenance of implants in patients and appeared to lack essential competences to this end. The main obstacles for providing implant maintenance care included insufficient knowledge and lack of a properly equipped clinical environment.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT

The results of this study can identify deficiencies in the currently available maintenance competences and schemes for patients with implants. These results can also help dental professionals, scientific bodies, and associations to design appropriate education and professional development strategies that can strengthen the confidence and competences of general dentists, thus offering better service to the public.

Preferred Source and Perceived Need of More Information about Dental Implants by the Undergraduate Dental Students of Nepal: All Nepal Survey

Objectives

This study was conducted to know the preferred source and perceived need of more information about dental implants by the undergraduate students of Nepal and their association with academic levels and gender.

Materials and Methods

It was conducted in all the dental colleges of Nepal from June 2016 to June 2017 after taking ethical clearance and approval from the research committee of BPKIHS. It included all those who were present at the time of survey. Data collection was done through a cross-sectional questionnaire survey during the academic schedule of the colleges, supervised and monitored by the investigators themselves. The collected data were coded and entered in Microsoft excel 2013, and statistical analysis was done by SPSS 20 version.

Result

A majority of the respondents agreed that they were not provided with sufficient information about implant treatment procedures during their BDS program (65.3%), would like more to be provided in the curriculum (95.1%), and would like to get additional reliable information from dental consultants and specialists (40.7%) and training on it from fellowship programs conducted by universities (39.2%). Significant association was seen between the responses and academic levels.

Conclusion

Undergraduate dental students of Nepal want more information about dental implants through various means.

Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan: a survey among certified dental lab technicians

Background

There are many implant cases in which dental technicians take initiative with regard to the design of implant prostheses, and to a certain extent, this area of care is one in which dentists do not necessarily play the leading role. Moreover, inadequate communication between dental technicians and dentists and insufficient instructions for technicians has been highlighted as issues in the past. The purpose of this questionnaire is to improve the quality of implant prostheses and thereby contribute to patient service by clarifying, among other aspects of treatment, problem areas and considerations in the fabrication of implant prostheses, conceptual-level knowledge, and awareness of prosthodontics on the part of the dentists in charge of treatment and methods for preventing prosthetic complications.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was given to 120 certified dental technicians. To facilitate coverage of a broad range of topics, we classified the survey content into the following four categories and included detailed questions for (1) the conditions under which implant technicians work, (2) implant fixed prostheses, (3) implant overdentures, and (4) prosthetic complications.

Results

Out of 120 surveys sent, 74 technicians responded resulting in a response rate of 61.6%.

Conclusions

This survey served to clarify the current state of implant prosthodontics, issues, and considerations in the fabrication of implant prostheses, and the state of prosthetic complications and preventive initiatives, all from a laboratory perspective. The results of this survey suggested that, to fabricate prostheses with a high level of predictability, functional utility, and aesthetic satisfaction, it is necessary to reaffirm the importance for dentists to increase their prosthetic knowledge and work together with dental technicians to develop comprehensive treatment plans, implement an organized approach to prosthesis design, and accomplish occlusal reconstruction.

Implant Dentistry in General Practice. Part 1: Introduction

This paper, the first of two, provides an introduction to implant dentistry for the general dental practitioner. CPD/Clinical Relevance: Implant placement and restoration is becoming more common place in general dental practice to the point where it may already be considered a routine treatment option.

Oral implant placement and restoration by undergraduate students: clinical outcomes and student perceptions

INTRODUCTION

Universities are developing and implementing implant dentistry training to prepare dental professionals for the growing treatment needs. This study describes how implant dentistry is taught at the KU Leuven and focuses on implant-related clinical outcomes. Perspectives of participating undergraduate students are analysed with a view to improve oral implant dentistry training.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Implant dentistry training at the KU Leuven consists of theoretical lectures, pre-clinical hands-on workshops and clinical (surgical/prosthetic) experience. Questionnaires were used to investigate the perceptions of students on the educational programme. Radiographs were taken at implant insertion, at healing abutment connection, at restoration/prosthesis insertion and after 1 and 2 years of functional loading. The marginal bone level was measured from the implant-abutment connection to the first visible bone-to-implant contact.

RESULTS

One hundred and twelve implants were placed by 56 undergraduate students (61.5% of the total students) in 56 patients. After a follow-up time of 3 years, the cumulative implant survival rate, at implant level, was 97.1%. The mean marginal bone loss after 1 and 2 years in function was 0.35 mm and 0.39 mm, respectively. Eighty percentage of students were satisfied with the training, and they considered this sufficient preparation to perform implant placement under close supervision.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcome of implant treatment performed by undergraduate students under close supervision is similar to that reported by experienced clinicians/research teams. Clinical, surgical as well as restorative experience in addition to theoretical and pre-clinical training seems beneficial when implementing implant dentistry in the undergraduate programmes.

Knowledge and practice of implant-retained restorations among dental students in Saudi Arabia

Objectives:

The aim of the study was to assess the knowledge and practice of implant retained restorations (IRR) among senior dental students in Saudi Arabia.

Methods:

Four hundred questionnaires were distributed among senior dental students of five dental schools in Saudi Arabia. Student’s knowledge was assessed regarding which implant restoration [cement retained restoration (CRR) or screw retained restoration (SRR)] better provides the desired clinical properties. Students’ practice of IRR, perception of their knowledge and need for further education related to IRR were also assessed. Descriptive statistics and chi-square test were employed to assess collected data.

Results:

Three hundred and fifty four senior dental students responded at a response rate of 88.5%. Thirty three percent respondents did not have any practical experience of IRR. Students showed a clear preference for CRR with regards to aesthetics (71.4%), passive fit (55.3%), fabrication ease (57.3%) and fracture resistance (40%). SRR were considered to provide better retention (59.6%), soft tissue health (51.1%) and ease of retrievability (72%). Nearly 40% of students agreed that they did not get sufficient information related to IRR in undergraduate courses.

Conclusions:

Clinical training of IRR is compromised in the undergraduate curriculum in dental schools of Saudi Arabia. The knowledge of dental students regarding IRR was broadly in line with current evidence.