KNOWLEDGE AWARENESS AND PRACTICE OF VARIOUS IMPLANT PROSTHETIC OPTIONS PREFERRED BY DENTAL PRACTITIONERS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/kxg6ew94Keywords:
Implantprosthesis, dental implants, prosthetic options, abutments, dental professionals, implant dentistryAbstract
Introduction:Modern dentistry helps to restore the normal contour, function, esthetics, speech, and health regardless of the atrophy, disease, or injury of the stomatognathic system . However with traditional dentistry it becomes very difficult to achieve the above when the number of teeth remaining are less. With the advent of implant supported prosthesis and the long term success rates high quality treatment can be given to patients . Aim: To evaluate the awareness and practice of various implant prosthetic options preferred by dental practitioners in India. Material and methods: A cross-sectional survey was formulated for the dentists of India. 306 volunteers participated in this study between January to February of 2020. A validated questionnaire consisting of 16 close ended questions intended to solicit the level of participants' knowledge concerning various options in treatment planning for implant prosthesis was circulated using online social media. Majority of questions were graded using the ‘Even scale method’. The responses were collected using web protocol forms that enabled quick and secure access to data. Results: It was found that 62.7% dentists preferred a customized abutment over a prefabricated abutment. For customized abutment 37.3% preferred a ti-base casting, 23.5% milled abutments, 23.5% 3D printed customization whereas only 15.7% preferred a conventional casting. The preferred abutment material for anterior teeth was Zirconium (62.7%) rather than cobalt chromium (4%) or titanium (33.3%). 70.5% dentists preferred to splint the prosthesis. Regarding the splinting, 47.1% preferred sexant-wise splinting, 27.5% full arch splinted whereas 25.5% quadrant wise. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the current study, it can be concluded that dentists do not regularly adhere to prosthetic principles in implant dentistry. More awareness through CDE programs, seminars etc are needed to increase knowledge among practitioners for implant prosthesis.
Downloads
References
1. Gowd MS, Shankar T, Ranjan R, Singh A. Prosthetic Consideration in Implant-supported Prosthesis: A Review of Literature. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2017 Jun;7(Suppl 1):S1–7.
2. Dewan S, Khullar A, Sehgal M, Arora A. Implant failures: A broader perspective. Journal of Dental Implants. 2015;5:53. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-6781.154441
3. Omeroglu G. Comparison of treatment outcomes of patients with implant-supported fixed and removable prostheses. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.26226/morressier.5ac383262afeeb00097a3beb
4. Paquette DW, Brodala N, Williams RC. Risk Factors for Endosseous Dental Implant Failure. Dental Clinics of North America. 2006;50:361–74. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2006.05.002
5. Brånemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindström J, Hallén O, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 1977;16:1–132.
6. Norowski PA Jr, Bumgardner JD. Biomaterial and antibiotic strategies for peri-implantitis: a review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009 Feb;88(2):530–43.
7. Filho VM, Poubel L, Hidalgo R. Assessing the survival rates of dental implants in longitudinal studies with more than ten years of follow-up: a systematic review. Dental Press Implantology. 2014;8:28–34. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.14436/2237-650x.8.4.028-034.oar
8. Alqutaibi AY. Ceramic and Metal-Ceramic Restorations for Implant-Supported Prostheses Showed Similar Complications and Failure Rate. Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice. 2019;19:200–2. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jebdp.2019.05.007
9. Cavazos E, Bell FA. Preventing loosening of implant abutment screws. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1996;75:566–9. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3913(96)90464-3
10. Toru O. Estimation of implant osseointegration and abutment screw loosening by resonance frequency analysis. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.26226/morressier.59492152d462b80296c9f3c8
11. Assaf A, Daas M, Boittin A, Eid N, Postaire M. Prosthetic maintenance of different mandibular implant overdentures: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Aug;118(2):144–52.e5.
12. Glücker C, Rauch A, Hahnel S. Attitude and treatment options in implant-supported prosthetics: A survey among a cohort of German dentists. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2020;12:15. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.1.15
13. Mayer E, Klapper H-U, Nitschke I, Hahnel S. Observations, knowledge, and attitude towards treatment options in patients with dry mouth: a survey among German dentists. Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Dec;23(12):4189–94.
14. Korsch M, Walther W. Prefabricated Versus Customized Abutments: A Retrospective Analysis of Loosening of Cement-Retained Fixed Implant-Supported Reconstructions. The International Journal of Prosthodontics. 2015;28:522–6. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/ijp.4307
15. Borges T, Lima T, Carvalho Á, Dourado C, Carvalho V. The influence of customized abutments and custom metal abutments on the presence of the interproximal papilla at implants inserted in single-unit gaps: a 1-year prospective clinical study. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2014;25:1222–7. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.12257
16. Morton D, Gallucci G, Lin W-S, Pjetursson B, Polido W, Roehling S, et al. Group 2 ITI Consensus Report: Prosthodontics and implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:215–23.
17. Al Dosari AAF, Habib SR, Alnassar T, Alshihri A, Kamalan R. The current considerations in the fabrication of implant prostheses and the state of prosthetic complications: A survey among the dental technicians. Saudi Dent J. 2018 Oct;30(4):299–305.
18. Pjetursson BE, Zarauz C, Strasding M, Sailer I, Zwahlen M, Zembic A. A systematic review of the influence of the implant-abutment connection on the clinical outcomes of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 18:160–83.
19. Elsayed A, Wille S, Al-Akhali M, Kern M. Comparison of fracture strength and failure mode of different ceramic implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Apr;117(4):499–506.
20. Pjetursson BE, Valente NA, Strasding M, Zwahlen M, Liu S, Sailer I. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:199–214.
21. Wittneben J-G, Joda T, Weber H-P, Brägger U. Screw retained vs. cement retained implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis. Periodontol 2000. 2017 Feb;73(1):141–51.
22. Wittneben J-G, Millen C, Brägger U. Clinical performance of screw- versus cement-retained fixed implant-supported reconstructions--a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29 Suppl:84–98.
23. Korsch M, Robra B-P, Walther W. Cement-associated signs of inflammation: retrospective analysis of the effect of excess cement on peri-implant tissue. Int J Prosthodont. 2015 Jan;28(1):11–8.
24. Korsch M, Walther W, Bartols A. Cement-associated peri-implant mucositis. A 1-year follow-up after excess cement removal on the peri-implant tissue of dental implants. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 2017;19:523–9. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cid.12470
25. Korsch M, Obst U, Walther W. Cement-associated peri-implantitis: a retrospective clinical observational study of fixed implant-supported restorations using a methacrylate cement. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 Jul;25(7):797–802.
26. Stoumpis C, Kohal R-J. To splint or not to splint oral implants in the implant-supported overdenture therapy? A systematic literature review. J Oral Rehabil. 2011;38:857–69. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2011.02220.x
27. Brandt S, Brandt J, Ketabi A-R, Lauer H-C, Kunzmann A. Locator® versus ceramic/electroplated double crown attachments: a prospective study on the intraindividual comparison of implant-supported mandibular prostheses. Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Feb;23(2):763–70.
28. Toniollo M, Macedo A, Rodrigues R, Ribeiro R, de Mattos M. A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of the Stress Distribution Generated by Splinted and Nonsplinted Prostheses in the Rehabilitation of Various Bony Ridges with Regular or Short Morse Taper Implants. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 2017;32:372–6. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4696
29. Gunne J, Astrand P, Lindh T, Borg K, Olsson M. Tooth-implant and implant supported fixed partial dentures: a 10-year report. Int J Prosthodont. 1999 May;12(3):216–21.
30. Muddugangadhar BC, Amarnath GS, Sonika R, Chheda PS, Garg A. Meta-analysis of Failure and Survival Rate of Implant-supported Single Crowns, Fixed Partial Denture, and Implant Tooth-supported Prostheses. J Int Oral Health. 2015 Sep;7(9):11–7.
31. Goodkind RJ, Heringlake CB. Mandibular flexure in opening and closing movements. J Prosthet Dent. 1973 Aug;30(2):134–8.
32. Michalakis KX, Calvani P, Hirayama H. Biomechanical considerations on tooth-implant supported fixed partial dentures. J Dent Biomech. 2012 Oct 29;3:1758736012462025.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
