Jens Hartlev1,2, Peter Kohberg3, Søren Ahlmann4, Niels T Andersen5, Søren Schou1, Flemming Isidor6. 1. Section for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery & Oral Pathology, Department of Dentistry, Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 3. private practice, Tinglev, Denmark. 4. CoDENT, Aarhus, Denmark. 5. Section for Biostatistics, Institute of Public Health, Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. 6. Section for Prosthetic Dentistry, Department of Dentistry, Aarhus University, Health, Aarhus, Denmark.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess patient satisfaction and esthetic outcome after immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants involving a definitive individual abutment and a provisional crown followed by later placement of a definitive crown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In private practice, a single-tooth implant was placed immediately after tooth extraction in the esthetic zone of 54 patients. A definitive individual abutment and a provisional crown were mounted in the same visit. The definitive crown was placed after a mean period of 7 months. After a mean follow-up period of 33 months, the subjective and professional evaluation of the total implant treatment, peri-implant soft tissues, and implant crown were assessed on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS). The professional esthetic treatment outcome was also evaluated using pink esthetic score (PES), white esthetic score (WES), and total score of PES/WES. RESULTS: The evaluation of total implant treatment, peri-implant soft tissues, and implant crown demonstrated a significantly higher subjective than professional score for all 3 parameters (P < 0.001), for example, for the overall treatment, the mean scores were 9.4 and 7.0, respectively. A significant positive correlation was revealed between the professional VAS scores and the PESs and WESs. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants involving a definitive individual abutment and provisional crown followed by later placement of a definitive crown demonstrated high subjective and professional satisfaction. Generally, the professionals seem to be more critical than the patients. A strong correlation was observed between the professional VAS scores and the PES and WES scoring systems.
OBJECTIVES: To assess patient satisfaction and esthetic outcome after immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants involving a definitive individual abutment and a provisional crown followed by later placement of a definitive crown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In private practice, a single-tooth implant was placed immediately after tooth extraction in the esthetic zone of 54 patients. A definitive individual abutment and a provisional crown were mounted in the same visit. The definitive crown was placed after a mean period of 7 months. After a mean follow-up period of 33 months, the subjective and professional evaluation of the total implant treatment, peri-implant soft tissues, and implant crown were assessed on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS). The professional esthetic treatment outcome was also evaluated using pink esthetic score (PES), white esthetic score (WES), and total score of PES/WES. RESULTS: The evaluation of total implant treatment, peri-implant soft tissues, and implant crown demonstrated a significantly higher subjective than professional score for all 3 parameters (P < 0.001), for example, for the overall treatment, the mean scores were 9.4 and 7.0, respectively. A significant positive correlation was revealed between the professional VAS scores and the PESs and WESs. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants involving a definitive individual abutment and provisional crown followed by later placement of a definitive crown demonstrated high subjective and professional satisfaction. Generally, the professionals seem to be more critical than the patients. A strong correlation was observed between the professional VAS scores and the PES and WES scoring systems.
Authors: Wouter G van Nimwegen; Gerry M Raghoebar; Elise G Zuiderveld; Ronald E Jung; Henny J A Meijer; Sven Mühlemann Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2018-05-27 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Sandra AlTarawneh; Ahmad A S Hamdan; Abeer Alhadidi; Susan Hattar; Mohammad Al-Rabab'ah; Zaid Baqain Journal: Dent Res J (Isfahan) Date: 2020-03-17