Chronological Age as Factor Influencing the Dental Implant Osseointegration in the Jaw Bone.

The objectives of this study were to evaluate osseointegration of dental implant in the jaw bone in the young and elderly population and comparing the results to assess indicators and risk factors as age for the success or failure of dental implants. A retrospective study of 107 implants (Impladent, LASAK, Czech Republic) was prepared. The patients at implants surgery were divided in three groups. The patients were followed-up for a 7-year period. We evaluated osseointegration from long term point of view as a change of marginal bone levels close to dental implant. Marginal bone levels were recorded and analysed with regard to different patient- and implant-related factors. An influence of chronological age on change of marginal bone levels during 6-year retrospective study vas evaluated. The study examined 47 patient charts and 107 implants from the Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol. We proved that young healthy patients with long bridges or Branemarks have the same progression of marginal bone levels changes. The chronological age hasn't therefore direct influence on the osseointegration from long term point of view. But we found that the length of dental suprastrucure-prosthetic construction negatively influences marginal bone changes, though these results weren't statistically significant. More extensive dental implant suprastrucure undergoes smaller osseointegration. On the other hand the length of dental suprastrucure (prosthetic construction) negatively influences dental osseointegration in both groups of patient.

Medical Informatics and Information Technology Supporting Oral Medicine.

Electronic healthcare documentation is the key element of electronic healthcare (eHealth). Electronic oral health record (EOHR) supporting oral medicine is discussed. To provide dentists with a methodology and instrument to create oral health documentation in more efficient way, support information exchange and integration in dental domain and to ease dental decision-making and forensic dentistry identification tasks.The proposed methodology is used to model lifelong EOHR based on a small specific ontology where the use of other classification systems and nomenclatures, e.g. SNODENT, is possible. EOHRwith Lifelong DentCross user interface was developed and it has been supporting dental care at the University Hospital in Prague-Motol. The user interface is working in four languages and controlled by voice or keyboard. Lifelong DentCross user interface is reflecting the way of the work in dentistry and the EOHR can provide both structured and free text information to oral medicine.

Dental implants and improvement of oral health-related quality of life.

OBJECTIVES: Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) is a multifaceted field involving many factors. The aim of our study was to assess whether implant therapy improves OHRQoL in dental patients. METHODS: Patients receiving at least one implant completed a health-related questionnaire before and after the implantation (minimum 1.5 months). Questions covered the functional and aesthetic scales (AS). Paired differences in individual scores were analysed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. A univariate analysis of covariance was used to relate overall and scale-specific average paired differences to age, gender, marital and educational status. Multivariate analysis of covariance was used to assess interactions between the covariates and different scales of outcome. All tests were performed at statistical significance level α = 0.05. RESULTS: All twelve Wilcoxon tests supported an improvement in OHRQoL after implant placement. On the AS, the mean difference in OHRQoL scores was found to be associated with marital status, presence of aesthetic reasons for undergoing the surgery and number of front teeth replaced by implants. On the functional scale (FS), most significant associations were observed with the number of front teeth replaced via implantation, followed by the presence of chewing problems and marital status. The multivariate analysis helped to identify the covariates that varied significantly over the two scales of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Effects of covariates responding significantly differently on different scales should not be summarized using an overall univariate analysis, using paired score differences averaged over all items. Such effect summary would be misleading. In the present study, significant implant-related improvements in OHRQoL were observed on both the aesthetic and FS in patients with at least one implant in the front dental area.