Mahmoud Kazemi1, Farideh Geramipanah, Ramin Negahdari, Vahid Rakhshan. 1. Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; Center for Implant Research, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unlike passive sensitivity of implants/teeth that is assessed more, only three controversial studies have compared active tactile sensibility (ATS) of implants and teeth. PURPOSE: We aimed to explore the difference between the ATS of teeth and single-tooth implants. METHODS: The ATS of single-tooth implants and contralateral teeth was measured in 25 patients after they bit on gold andplacebo foils 0- to 70-μm thick, each for five times, in a random order blinded to patients and assessor, carried out at two sessions. Based on the experimental range of 0 μm (mock trials) to 70 μm, the sigmoid shape of psychometric curve was estimated to locate the 50% values as the ATS thresholds for each tooth or implant. ATS Data were analyzed using paired and unpaired t-tests and multiple linear regression (α = 0.05, β ≤ 0.1). Also, equivalence testing approach was used to assess semi-objectively the clinical significance. RESULTS:Average ATS values for teeth and implants were 21.4 ± 6.55 μm and 30.0 ± 7.55 μm, respectively (p = .0001 [paired t-test]). None of the geometric characteristics of implants nor duration of implant in function were correlated with the ATS (p > .4 [regression]). Age was positively associated with the ATS of both implants and teeth (p ≤ .019 [regression]). Tooth ATS (but not implant ATS) was significantly higher in males compared with females (p = .050 [unpaired t-test]), which contributed to a generalizable tooth-implant difference higher than 8-μm clinical equivalence margin in females. The ATS was not significantly different between arches or between anterior/posterior regions (p > .6). CONCLUSION: There was a slight but statistically significant difference between implant and tooth tactile sensitivities.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Unlike passive sensitivity of implants/teeth that is assessed more, only three controversial studies have compared active tactile sensibility (ATS) of implants and teeth. PURPOSE: We aimed to explore the difference between the ATS of teeth and single-tooth implants. METHODS: The ATS of single-tooth implants and contralateral teeth was measured in 25 patients after they bit on gold and placebo foils 0- to 70-μm thick, each for five times, in a random order blinded to patients and assessor, carried out at two sessions. Based on the experimental range of 0 μm (mock trials) to 70 μm, the sigmoid shape of psychometric curve was estimated to locate the 50% values as the ATS thresholds for each tooth or implant. ATS Data were analyzed using paired and unpaired t-tests and multiple linear regression (α = 0.05, β ≤ 0.1). Also, equivalence testing approach was used to assess semi-objectively the clinical significance. RESULTS: Average ATS values for teeth and implants were 21.4 ± 6.55 μm and 30.0 ± 7.55 μm, respectively (p = .0001 [paired t-test]). None of the geometric characteristics of implants nor duration of implant in function were correlated with the ATS (p > .4 [regression]). Age was positively associated with the ATS of both implants and teeth (p ≤ .019 [regression]). Tooth ATS (but not implant ATS) was significantly higher in males compared with females (p = .050 [unpaired t-test]), which contributed to a generalizable tooth-implant difference higher than 8-μm clinical equivalence margin in females. The ATS was not significantly different between arches or between anterior/posterior regions (p > .6). CONCLUSION: There was a slight but statistically significant difference between implant and tooth tactile sensitivities.
Authors: Yan Huang; Michael M Bornstein; Ivo Lambrichts; Hai-Yang Yu; Constantinus Politis; Reinhilde Jacobs Journal: Int J Oral Sci Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 6.344