ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sinus augmentation has become a more predictable and successful procedure as the knowledge of its indications and complications increased. However, knowledge of risk factors leading to early implant failure (EIF) among challenging systemic and local conditions is insufficient. OBJECTIVES: The present study aims to assess risk factors for EIF following sinus augmentation in a challenging cohort. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study conducted during a period of 8 years in a tertiary referral centre providing surgical and dental health care. Implant and patient variables including age, ASA (American Society of Anesthesiology) physical status classification, smoking, residual alveolar bone, type of anaesthesia and EIF were collected. RESULTS: Cohort was comprised of 751 implants placed in 271 individuals. EIF rates at the implant and patient level were 6.3% and 12.5%, respectively. EIF was found to be higher among smokers (patient level: χ2 (1) = 8.74, p = .003), ASA 2 physical classification patients (patient level: χ2 (2) = 6.75, p = .03), sinuses augmented under general anaesthesia (patient level: χ2 (1)=8.97, p = .003), higher bone gain (implant level: W = 12 350, p = .004), lower residual alveolar bone height (implant level: W = 13 837, p = .001) and multiple implantations (patient level: W = 3016.5, p = 0.01). However, other variables such as age, gender, collagen membrane and implant's dimensions did not reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the study, we can conclude that smoking, ASA 2 physical status classification, general anaesthesia, low residual alveolar bone height and numerous implants are risk factors for EIF following sinus augmentation in challenging cohorts.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess decision making process and knowledge level of dentists treating children with type 1 diabetes. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey among dentistry residents and dental specialists working in clinics that provide dental care to children with type 1 diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 166 respondents were included. 42% of respondents perceived that they have sufficient knowledge to treat children with diabetes, in correlation with an average score of 1.9 out of 4 on knowledge questions. Over 80% of dentists decided to treat patients by consulting with the treating physician or by checking HbA1c and glucose blood levels independently. Greater knowledge was associated with a significantly higher tendency of the dentists to determine if the child's diabetes is controlled, and to refer less often to the hospital. Furthermore, greater knowledge was also associated with dentists' greater perception that they have enough knowledge, skills and confidence to treat children with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed significant gaps in the knowledge on diabetes among dentists who provide dental care to children. Dentists, pediatricians, endocrinologists, and other healthcare professionals who provide care for children should be encouraged to collaborate to create a mutual knowledgeable work environment for delivering best care to their patients.
