An evidence‐based review of patient‐reported outcome measures in dental implant research among dentate subjects

McGrath, Colman; Lam, Olt; Lang, Niklaus P.

doi:10.1111/j.1600-051x.2011.01841.x

Cited by 93 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A large body of literature in this review discusses the association between expectations and satisfaction, which is also a hot topic in other fields related to patient-reported outcomes (PROs ) [33,34]. In contrast to expectations, which are relatively new concept, patient satisfaction has been investigated longer and in more depth.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients' expectations from dental implants: a systematic review of the literature

Yao

Tang

Gao

et al. 2014

Health Qual Life Outcomes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo examine the current literature on the impact of patients’ expectations on treatment outcomes or final patient satisfaction and to identify the theoretical frameworks, study designs and measurement instruments which have been employed to assess patients’ expectations within implant dentistry.MethodsA structured literature search of four databases Pubmed, Cochrane, Web of Science and PsychINFO was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Any type of literature published in English discussing the topic of ‘patients expectations’ in oral health were identified and further screened. Studies reporting on expectations regarding dental implants were selected and a narrative review was conducted.ResultsThe initial search yielded 16707 studies, out of which 1051 ‘potentially effective studies’ were further assessed and final 41 ‘effective studies’ were included [Kappa = 0.76]. Ten observational studies, published from 1999 to 2013, dealt specifically with expectations of dental implants. There was a large degree of heterogeneity among studies in terms of assessment instruments. Expectations relating to aesthetics and function were primarily considered. Among the 10 studies, 8 were classified as quantitative research and 2 as qualitative research. The STROBE quality of reporting scores of the studies ranged from 13.5 to 18.0. Three of the 8 quantitative studies employed a before/after study design (prospective studies) and used visual analogue scales (VAS) to measure patient expectations.ConclusionsThere is a growing interest in patients’ expectations of dental implants. Most studies are cross sectional in nature and the quality of reporting varies considerably. Expectations with respect to aesthetics and function are key attributes considered. The use of visual analogue scales (VAS) provides quantitative assessments of patients’ expectations but the lack of standardization of measures prohibits meta- analyses.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients' expectations from dental implants: a systematic review of the literature

Yao

Tang

Gao

et al. 2014

Health Qual Life Outcomes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a consequence, the focus of research has shifted from function and long-term survival outcomes to an increasing interest in esthetic outcomes, including patient-centered outcomes. 13,33,34 Accordingly, we included a questionnaire to assess the perceived esthetic outcome of both implant and restoration. As presented in Table 4, both P-Is and participants reported a high degree of satisfaction with the implants and restorations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of implants and restorations placed in general dental practices

Silva¹,

Kazimiroff²,

Papas³

et al. 2014

The Journal of the American Dental Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The authors conducted a study to determine the types, outcomes, risk factors and esthetic assessment of implants and their restorations placed in the general practices of a practice-based research network. Methods All patients who visited network practices three to five years previously and underwent placement of an implant and restoration within the practice were invited to enroll. Practitioner-investigators (P-Is) recorded the status of the implant and restoration, characteristics of the implant site and restoration, presence of peri-implant pathology and an esthetic assessment by the P-I and patient. The P-Is classified implants as failures if the original implant was missing or had been replaced, the implant was mobile or elicited pain on percussion, there was overt clinical or radiographic evidence of pathology or excessive bone loss (> 0.2 millimeter per year after an initial bone loss of 2 mm). They classified restorations as failures if they had been replaced or if there was abutment or restoration fracture. Results The authors enrolled 922 implants and patients from 87 practices, with a mean (standard deviation) follow-up of 4.2 (0.6) years. Of the 920 implants for which complete data records were available, 64 (7.0 percent) were classified as failures when excessive bone loss was excluded from the analysis. When excessive bone loss was included, 172 implants (18.7 percent) were classified as failures. According to the results of univariate analysis, a history of severe periodontitis, sites with preexisting inflammation or type IV bone, cases of immediate implant placement and placement in the incisor or canine region were associated with implant failure. According to the results of multivariate analysis, sites with preexisting inflammation (odds ratio [OR] = 2.17; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 1.41–3.34]) or type IV bone (OR = 1.99; 95 percent CI, 1.12–3.55) were associated with a greater risk of implant failure. Of the 908 surviving implants, 20 (2.2 percent) had restorations replaced or judged as needing to be replaced. The majority of P-Is and patients were satisfied with the esthetic outcomes for both the implant and restoration. Conclusions These results suggest that implant survival and success rates in general dental practices may be lower than those reported in studies conducted in academic or specialty settings. Practical Implications The results of this study, generated in the private general practice setting, add to the evidence base to facilitate implant treatment planning.

show abstract

“…Although the QoL assessment of this study was based on a small sample, as a preliminary study, the repeated assessments offer a useful insight into the trajectory of QoL during the first year following prosthetic placement that can inform future research for evidence based practice. Increasingly, it is recognized that patients' perceptions are important in assessing health needs and in determining health outcomes from health care services in both medicine and dentistry [48, 49]. This is particularly pertinent when outcomes are not necessarily associated with mortality but rather have impact on day-to-day living or “quality of life”.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was a welcome finding to observe improvements in “mood,” “body image,” and “interactions with family, friends, and strangers”. Impact on social and psychological aspects is referred to as “ultimate” impact aspects as they can result in handicapping effects, which detract from social interaction in personal and working life [48, 49]. The observed “improvements” (increase in domain scores) highlight the responsiveness of the outcome measure to capture such changes, in that not only should there be statistical significant changes, the changes should be in a positive direction—a psychometric attribute of “responsiveness” [51].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychosocial and Quality of Life Outcomes of Prosthetic Auricular Rehabilitation with CAD/CAM Technology

Tam

McGrath

et al. 2014

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. The psychosocial and quality of life (QoL) of patients with deformed or missing ears are frequently compromised. The aim of this study is to develop innovative techniques using CAD/CAM technology in prosthetic auricular rehabilitation and provide improvement in the treatment outcomes, including their psychology and QoL. Methods. This is a preliminary clinical cohort study. Six patients requesting for auricular reconstruction were recruited and rehabilitated with implant-supported prosthesis using CAD/CAM technology. Different treatment outcomes including QoL and psychological changes were assessed at different time points. Results. A significant reduction in severity of depressive symptoms (P = 0.038) and an improving trend of satisfaction with life were found at 1 year postoperatively when compared with the preoperative findings. The domain scores in ‘‘Body image”, ‘‘Family/friends/strangers”, and ‘‘Mood” were also significantly higher (P < 0.05) at 1 year postoperatively than 1 week postoperatively. However, only 50% of the patients wear their auricular prosthesis regularly. Conclusion. This preliminary study has confirmed that implant-supported auricular prosthesis could induce improvement in the psychology and QoL with statistically significant differences in the domains of the body image, social interaction, and mood. Our present findings can inform research design and hypotheses generation of future studies.

show abstract

An evidence‐based review of patient‐reported outcome measures in dental implant research among dentate subjects

Cited by 93 publications

References 42 publications

Patients' expectations from dental implants: a systematic review of the literature

Patients' expectations from dental implants: a systematic review of the literature

Outcomes of implants and restorations placed in general dental practices

Psychosocial and Quality of Life Outcomes of Prosthetic Auricular Rehabilitation with CAD/CAM Technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About