Patient satisfaction following dental implant treatment: A survey.

PURPOSES: This aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the factors associated with patient satisfaction in patients with a dental implant-supported single crown or fixed prosthesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and ninety-six patients with dental implants functioning more than 1 year were provided with a 13-question questionnaire to report their satisfaction regarding the functional aspects, aesthetic outcome, cleansing ability, general satisfaction, treatment cost, and overall satisfaction. Patient satisfaction was reported using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The association of these variables and each aspect of satisfaction were investigated by multivariate linear regression analysis. RESULTS: One hundred forty-four of 196 patients reported high overall satisfaction (VAS > 80%). All aspects of patient satisfaction levels were very high (mean VAS > 80%), except for satisfaction in cleansing ability and treatment cost (mean VAS < 75%). The patients with a history of implant failure had significantly lower satisfaction in the functional aspects, aesthetic outcome, and general satisfaction than patients without implant failure (p ≤ 0.001). The subjects who experienced mechanical complication were less satisfied with treatment cost (p = 0.002). Sinus augmentation negatively affected functional satisfaction compared with individuals without sinus augmentation (p = 0.041). The subjects with a higher income or a posterior implant had significantly higher overall satisfaction (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001, respectively). Moreover, restoration by specialists positively affected general satisfaction compared with being restored by post-graduate students (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients restored with a dental implant-supported single crown or fixed prosthesis had very high patient satisfaction. Implant failure, mechanical complication, and sinus augmentation negatively affected patient satisfaction in multiple aspects. In contrast, the factors positively affecting patient satisfaction were a posterior implant, patient's monthly income, and restoration by specialists. These results have to be interpreted with care due to the cross-sectional study design.

Association between keratinized mucosa width and peri-implant diagnostic parameters in Asian maintenance compliers: A Cross-sectional study.

Aims: To investigate the association between the keratinized mucosa (KM) width and peri-implant diagnostic parameters in implant maintenance. Materials and methods: A total of 331 posterior implant-supported fixed prostheses in 165 patients were evaluated. Demographic data were collected from history taking and treatment records. Plaque index, bleeding index, probing depth, mucosal recession, and bone level in relation to buccal keratinized mucosa were examined. The Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and multivariable models were used as the statistical tests. Results: The majority of subjects attended implant maintenance at least once a year and demonstrated optimal oral hygiene. keratinized mucosa width ranged from 0-7 mm. Considering the keratinized mucosa widths, a marked recession was determined at < 2 mm keratinized mucosa and less recession was determined at > 2 mm keratinized mucosa. The multivariate model indicated that < 2 mm keratinized mucosa was significantly associated with increased mucosal recession (B = 0.12; CI: 0.01, 0.23). Plaque accumulation, mucosal inflammation, and interproximal bone level were not related to keratinized mucosa width after adjusting for oral hygiene, smoking status, history of chronic periodontitis, and implant prosthesis type. Conclusions: The presence of more than 2 mm of KM width was associated with mucosal recession. However, other peri-implant diagnostic parameters were not associated with the width of keratinized mucosa.

The lack of keratinized mucosa is associated with poor peri-implant tissue health: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cross-sectional study is to determine the association between the absence of keratinized mucosa and peri-implant tissue health. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This cross-sectional study comprised 412 implants from 200 patients from faculty-based clinics. Demographic, medical, and clinical information were collected. The modified sulcus bleeding index, modified plaque index, mucosal recession, probing depth, bone level, the width of keratinized mucosa, and implant status were evaluated by three calibrated examiners. Each implant was categorized into either of two peri-implant mucosa groups: keratinized mucosa (KM) or non-keratinized mucosa (NKM). The chi-square test was performed to the association between the keratinized mucosa groups and peri-implant clinical parameters and peri-implant status. Multiple logistic regression models were analyzed to test potential associations between peri-implant clinical parameters and the presence or absence of keratinized mucosa. RESULTS: Thirty-two implants (7.8%) were categorized into the NKM group. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was 12.5% and 8.3% at the subject level and implant level, respectively. The NKM group was associated with more plaque accumulation, mucosal recession, interproximal bone level ≥ 3 mm, and peri-implantitis (p < 0.05). After controlling for confounding factors, the NKM group demonstrated higher plaque accumulation, mucosal recession, and interproximal bone level ≥ 3 mm with adjusted odds ratios of 2.98 (1.33-6.66), 3.20 (95% CI, 1.03-9.90), and 4.62 (1.70-12.58), respectively. CONCLUSION: Within the limitation of this study, the lack of keratinized mucosa around the dental implants was significantly associated with more plaque accumulation, mucosal recession, interproximal bone level ≥ 3 mm, and peri-implantitis.

The effect of factors related to periodontal status toward peri-implantitis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between periodontal status and peri-implant diseases in patients with osseointegrated dental implants of different implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated 200 consecutive implant patients using clinical and radiographic examinations during periodontal maintenance visits. The demographic data and treatment history were obtained from history taking and chart record review. The association between periodontal status and peri-implant diseases was analyzed using chi-square and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Patients with a history of chronic periodontitis had a significantly higher prevalence of peri-implantitis compared with those without a history of periodontal disease (25% vs. 10.9%). The highest prevalence of peri-implantitis was observed in patients with a history of severe chronic periodontitis. Data analysis revealed that peri-implant health status was significantly associated with past periodontal status, maintenance status, and present periodontal status. However, multivariate analysis indicated that only a history of chronic periodontitis was significantly associated with peri-implantitis (adjusted OR = 2.55, 95% CI 1.14-5.70, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a history of chronic periodontitis, especially those with severe periodontal disease had a 2.5-fold increased risk of peri-implantitis.