Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Changes in oral health-related quality of life after three different strategies of implant therapy: a clinical trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This research aims to evaluate changes in Oral Health-related Quality of Life (OHQoL) by means of the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP) of patients treated with three distinct implant strategies. This clinical trial consisted of an oral examination and a questionnaire-based interview carried out before and after the definitive prosthetic rehabilitation in a consecutive sample of patients requiring dental implants. According to the clinical diagnosis and patient preference, patients were assigned to the one of the following groups: the conventional group (CGCL; n = 40), where implants were inserted without guiding and conventionally loaded; to the guided surgery but conventional loading group (GSCL; n = 35); or to the guided surgery and immediate loading group (GSIL; n = 29). At baseline, the OHQoL was significantly greater among those assigned to CGCL (2.4 ± 1.3) than those assigned to GSCL (3.3 ± 1.3), which were both greater than those patients assigned to GSIL (4.6 ± 2.0). After implant therapy, the oral well-being was significantly better than at baseline, and patient satisfaction was greater when the implants were loaded immediately (8.7 ± 1.1) than if the prosthetic rehabilitation was delayed (8.3 ± 1.1). In the GSIL group, the effect size of the OIDP exceeded the threshold value of 0.8 for all of the OIDP domains and for the total OIDP score and patient satisfaction. A global improvement in the OHQoL scores and patient satisfaction was observed after implant therapy, but the change was markedly greater in the GSIL group.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: The Toronto study. Part II: the prosthetic results. J Prosthet Dent. 1990;64:53–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brennan M, Houston F, O’Sullivan M, O’Connell B. Patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life outcomes of implant overdentures and fixed complete dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25:791–800.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Strassburger C, Heydecke G, Kerschbaum T. Influence of prosthetic and implant therapy on satisfaction and quality of life: a systematic literature review. Part 1–Characteristics of the studies. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17:83–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Locker D. Patient-based assessment of the outcomes of implant therapy: a review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11:453–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. McGrath C, Lam O, Lang N. An evidence-based review of patient-reported outcome measures in dental implant research among dentate subjects. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39:193–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Strassburger C, Kerschbaum T, Heydecke G. Influence of implant and conventional prostheses on satisfaction and quality of life: a literature review. Part 2: qualitative analysis and evaluation of the studies. Int J Prosthodont. 2006;19:339–48.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brånemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindström J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969;3:81–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Maghaireh H, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different times for loading dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;28:CD003878.

    Google Scholar 

  9. van Steenberghe D, Glauser R, Blombäck U, Andersson M, Schutyser F, Pettersson A, et al. A computed tomographic scan-derived customized surgical template and fixed prosthesis for flapless surgery and immediate loading of implants in fully edentulous maxillae: a prospective multicenter study. Clin Implant DentRelat Res. 2005;7:111-20.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fortin T, Bosson JL, Isidori M, Blanchet E. Effect of flapless surgery on pain experienced in implant placement using an image-guided system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;21:298–304.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cannizzaro G, Leone M, Esposito M. Immediate versus early loading of two implants placed with a flapless technique supporting mandibular bar-retained overdentures: a single-blinded, randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2008;1:33–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cannizzaro G, Torchio C, Leone M, Esposito M. Immediate versus early loading of flapless-placed implants supporting maxillary full-arch prostheses: a randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2008;1:127–39.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Vercruyssen M, Cox C, Naert I, Jacobs R, Teughels W, Quirynen M. Accuracy and patient-centered outcome variables in guided implant surgery: a RCT comparing immediate with delayed loading. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27:427–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vercruyssen M, van de Wiele G, Teughels W, Naert I, Jacobs R, Quirynen M. Implant- and patient-centred outcomes of guided surgery, a 1-year follow-up: An RCT comparing guided surgery with conventional implant placement. J Clin Periodontol. 2014;41:1154–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18:719–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lekholm U, Zarb GA. Tissue-integrated prostheses. In: Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, editors. Tissue-integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence. 1985; pp. 199–209.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Montero J, Bravo M, Albaladejo A. Validation of two complementary oral-health related quality of life indicators (OIDP and OSS 0–10) in two qualitatively distinct samples of the Spanish population. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:101.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Locker D. Issues in measuring change in self-perceived oral health status. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998;26:41–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care. 1989;27:178-89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hultin M, Svensson KG, Trulsson M. Clinical advantages of computer-guided implant placement: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23:124-35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Heydecke G, Locker D, Awad MA, Lund JP, Feine JS. Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2003;31:161–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dolz J, Silvestre FJ, Montero J. Changes in general and oral health-related quality of life in immediate or conventionally loaded dental implants: a nonrandomized clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29:391–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Molina A, Sanz-Sánchez I, Martín C, Blanco J, Sanz M. The effect of one-time abutment placement on interproximal bone levels and peri-implant soft tissues: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28:443–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Covani U, Ricci M, D’Ambrosio N, Quaranta A, Barone A. Changes in soft tissues around immediate full-arch rehabilitations: a prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24:122–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Feine JS, Awad MA, Lund JP. The impact of patient preference on the design and interpretation of clinical trials. Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998;26:70–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Awad MA, Lund JP, Dufresne E, Feine JS. Comparing the efficacy of mandibular implant-retained overdentures and conventional dentures among middle-aged edentulous patients: satisfaction and functional assessment. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16:117–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Awad MA, Lund JP, Shapiro SH, Locker D, Klemetti E, Chehade A, et al. Oral health status and treatment satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures: a randomized clinical trial in a senior population. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16:390–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tang L, Lund JP, Taché R, Clokie CM, Feine JS. A within-subject comparison of mandibular long-bar and hybrid implant-supported prostheses: psychometric evaluation and patient preference. J Dent Res. 1997;76:1675–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Michaud PL, de Grandmont P, Feine JS, Emami E. Measuring patient-based outcomes: is treatment satisfaction associated with oral health-related quality of life? J Dent. 2012;40:624–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Thomas MV, Puleo DA. Infection, inflammation, and bone regeneration: a paradoxical relationship. J Dent Res. 2011;90:1052–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Pozzi A, Tallarico M, Marchetti M, Scarfò B, Esposito M. Computer-guided versus free-hand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 1-year post-loading results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7:229–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Arisan V, Karabuda CZ, Ozdemir T. Implant surgery using bone- and mucosa-supported stereolithographic guides in totally edentulous jaws: surgical and post-operative outcomes of computer-aided vs. standard techniques. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21:980–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was part of the doctoral dissertation of the second author (J Dolz), leaded by the third author (JF Silvestre) at the University of Valencia. The research group named Avances en Salud Oral from the University of Salamanca supported the publication of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier Montero.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. There were no financial, economic, or professional interests that influenced the design, execution, or presentation of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Montero, J., Dolz, J., Silvestre, FJ. et al. Changes in oral health-related quality of life after three different strategies of implant therapy: a clinical trial. Odontology 107, 383–392 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0406-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0406-x

Keywords

Navigation