Validation of the “Quality of Life related to function, aesthetics, socialization, and thoughts about health-behavioural habits (QoLFAST-10)” scale for wearers of implant-supported fixed partial dentures

Outcome measurements and quality of randomized controlled clinical trials of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review and qualitative analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The lack of consensus regarding a standardized set of outcome measurements and noncompliance with current reporting guidelines in clinical trials of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) hamper interstudy comparability, compromise scientific evidence, and waste research effort and resources in prosthetic dentistry.

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this systematic review was to identify all primary and secondary outcome measurements assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of tooth-supported FDPs. Secondary objectives were to assess their methodological quality by using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool (RoB, v2.0) and their reporting quality by means of a standardized 16-item CONSORT assessment tool through published reports.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library to identify all RCT-related articles published in the past 10 years. Differences in RoB were tested with the Pearson chi-square test, and those in CONSORT score with the Student t test.

RESULTS

A total of 64 RCTs from 79 publications were deemed eligible. The diversity of outcome measures used in the field is apparent. Twenty percent of the included studies had a low RoB, 79% showed some concerns, and 1% had a high RoB. The mean ±standard deviation CONSORT compliance score was 22.56 ±3.17. Trials adhered to the CONSORT statement reported lower RoB than those that did not adhere (P<.001). RCTs with a low RoB reported more comprehensive adherence to CONSORT guidelines than those with some concerns (MD 4 [95% CI 1.52-6.48]; P=.004).

CONCLUSIONS

A standardized core outcome reporting set in clinical research on tooth-supported FDPs remains evident. Adherence to the CONSORT statement continues to be low, with some RoB concerns that can be improved.

'Role of the modulating factors on the self-perceived OHRQoL of fully dentate subjects and wearers of screw-retained and cement-retained implant-supported FPDs: A cross-sectional study'

OBJECTIVES

This research aimed to compare the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) between fully dentate subjects and edentulous patients wearing implant-supported fixed partial dentures (i-FPDs). The clinical conditions of both types of restorations were evaluated.

METHODS

Participants were assigned to: Group-1 (SR, n= 50): screw-retained i-FPD wearers; Group-2 (CR, n= 50): cement-retained i-FPD wearers; and Group-3 (ND, n= 50): dentate subjects with a healthy natural dentition (controls). Patients answered the OHIP-14sp and QoLIP-10 questionnaires. Data related to sociodemographics, prosthesis features, peri-implant status, complications, and subjective evaluations, were compiled. Potential modulators of the OHRQoL and the i-FPDs' clinical conditions were assessed using non-parametric tests (α= 0.05).

RESULTS

ND individuals were the least satisfied (OHIP-14sp; p< 0.001). Both prosthodontic groups reported similar levels of wellbeing, excluding the speaking difficulties, which were lower for SR wearers as shown by both scales (p= 0.001). The most discontented patients (OHIP-14sp) were: women (p= 0.022), under 65 years (p= 0.03), without partner (p< 0.001) and having a crown (p= 0.033). The level of education/schooling also affected the OHIP-14sp scores (p< 0.001). Implant mobility and peri-implantitis were more frequent among CR wearers (p-values= 0.008 and 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The OHRQoL of both prosthodontic groups was comparably higher than that of the dentate subjects, who were the most nonconformist. The self-perceived satisfaction was mainly modulated by sociodemographic factors.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Overall, the retention system did not impact the OHRQoL, prosthetic problems, and subjective evaluations of i-FPD wearers. However, the cementation may increase the risk of peri-implant diseases.

Nonmalignant Oral Disease--Specific Dental Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Adult Patients: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) can be differentiated into outcome measures for all oral diseases, so-called disease-generic dPROMs, and measures for specific oral diseases, so-called disease-specific dPROMs. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the psychometrically validated nonmalignant disease-specific dPROMs for adult patients and the dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) they measure.

METHODS

This systematic review searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane databases along with hand searching, through July 28, 2020, to identify original articles of English language, multi-item dPROMs for adult dental patients with a specific oral disease, condition, or oral manifestations of systemic diseases. We analyzed the questionnaires for content commonalities, the reference or recall period, and the dimensionality.

RESULTS

We retrieved 4228 unique references and identified 34 questionnaires; of which, 31 questionnaires captured impacts from oral diseases or conditions and three from oral manifestations of systemic diseases. All questionnaires together contained 102 dPROMs, measuring 75 dPROs. Oral health-related quality of life was a broader dPRO, which was measured by 24 dPROMs. The 74 narrower dPROs were measured by 78 dPROMs. The dPRO names suggested that essentially four dPROs were measured: Oral Function (N = 19), Orofacial Pain (N = 7), Orofacial Appearance (N = 11), and Psychosocial Impact (N = 37).

CONCLUSIONS

Many psychometrically validated tools (N = 102) are available to measure the impact of specific nonmalignant oral disease on patients. While these tools intend to measure the particular patient-perceived impact profile of the oral disease, all tools measure in essence only four, more general concepts - the dimensions of oral health-related quality of life.

Functional oral health-related quality of life impact: A systematic review in populations with tooth loss

Patients perceive the impact of oral disorder in four major areas, the dimensions of oral health-related quality life (OHRQoL) Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. The functional aspect is essential given the need of chewing, biting, speech and swallowing. The objective of this study was to identify OHRQoL information for dental subjects with functional oral health problems. In a systematic review, distinct and clinically relevant groups of dental subject samples, in this study called "population groups," with such functional OHRQoL information based on the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) were identified (PROSPERO registration: CRD42017064033). The search strategy was "Oral Health Impact Profile" or OHIP. Searches were conducted in the PubMed interface of the Medline database, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsyINFO on 8 June 2017 and updated on 14 January 2019. Published OHIP domain data of different versions were recalculated into OHIP-14`s Physical Disability domain score, characterising the subject's Oral Function impact. 3,653 potentially abstracts were screened. We identified 78 publications reporting dimensional information on 154 subject samples with 52 populations. A typical mean functional impact for partially dentate subjects was 1.6 units on a 0 to 8 unit metric, while for edentate subjects, the mean functional impact was 2.6 units. The functional impact score ranged from 0 to 7.9 units with 50% of the patient samples located between 0.8 and 2.6 units. For the first time, we provide normalised and therefore comparable metric information about the functional OHRQoL impact for a substantial number of functional oral conditions.

On the Future Design of Bio-Inspired Polyetheretherketone Dental Implants

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a promising implant material because of its excellent mechanical characteristics. Although this polymer is a standard material in spinal applications, PEEK is not in use in the manufacturing of dental implants, where titanium is still the most-used material. This may be caused by its relative bio-inertness. By the use of various surface modification techniques, efforts have been made to enhance its osseointegrative characteristics to enable the polymer to be used in dentistry. In this feature paper, the state-of-the-art for dental implants is given and different surface modification techniques of PEEK are discussed. The focus will lie on a covalently attached surface layer mimicking natural bone. The usage of such covalently anchored biomimetic composite materials combines many advantageous properties: A biocompatible organic matrix and a mineral component provide the cells with a surrounding close to natural bone. Bone-related cells may not recognize the implant as a foreign body and therefore, may heal and integrate faster and more firmly. Because neither metal-based nor ceramics are ideal material candidates for a dental implant, the combination of PEEK and a covalently anchored mineralized biopolymer layer may be the start of the desired evolution in dental surgery.

Quality of life assessment of patients utilizing orbital implant-supported prostheses

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Evaluate the effect of orbital prosthesis retained by implants through a specific quality of life (QOL) questionnaire provides important information on patients QOL, great incentive for the multidisciplinary team and public health support to continue work in this area.

PURPOSE

The objective of the study was to evaluate patient satisfaction with orbital implant-supported prostheses using an adapted quality of life questionnaire.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty five patients using orbital implant-supported prostheses for a period ranging from six to 120 months. The subjects answered a questionnaire that consisted of 10 questions covering appearance, retention, conspicuousness, self-confidence, difficulty of placement, difficulty of removal, cleaning, limitation of activities, discomfort of tissues, and recommendation of the method to other patients. Answers were expressed using a visual 100-mm scale. The arithmetic mean of the responses was converted into a percentage to represent the satisfaction index.

RESULTS

Patients demonstrated a high level of satisfaction on all items, with the lowest rate being for aesthetics and the highest being for recommending the method to other patients. High satisfaction rates regarding the placement and removal of the prosthesis, discomfort to the tissues, and cleaning suggest the ease of handling of the prosthesis. High satisfaction with retention, self-confidence, conspicuousness of the prosthesis, and limitation of activities indicated an association with a better social life.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that use of bone anchorage technique of extraoral prostheses provided a high level of satisfaction among patients, confirming that osseointegrated implants are a very important resource for the rehabilitation of orbital deformities.

Combination of straight and tilted implants for supporting screw-retained dental prostheses in atrophic posterior maxillae: A 2-year prospective study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the two-year survival rate (SR) and marginal bone loss (MBL) of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) supported by straight (S) and tilted (T) implants under the influence of diverse study variables.

METHODS

A prospective investigation comprising 21 patients provided with a total of 27 maxillary screw-retained restorations fixed to 70 dental implants was developed. Two groups of implants were considered depending on their inclination with respect to the occlusal plane: Group 1 (S, n=37): straight/axial implants and Group 2 (T, n=33): tilted/angled fixations. Each FDP was supported by a combination of S and T implants. SR and MBL were assessed at the time of loading and two years after surgery. Patient-, surgical- and/or rehabilitation-related information was gathered. Data were statistically analysed at the α=0.05 significance level.

RESULTS

After 24 months, a 100% SR was achieved and the MBL of S and T implants were statistically similar. T implants located in the molar region showed lower MBL than did those replacing premolars (p=0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Upright and angled fixations inserted at posterior maxillary areas resulted in comparable survival rates and peri-implant MBL after two years. The marginal bone resorption around tilted implants depended on their location.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Screw-retained restorations fixed to straight and tilted implants seem to be a safe treatment option in posterior atrophic maxillae.