Limits...
Aesthetic perception of single implants placed in the anterior zone. A cross-sectional study.

Burgueño-Barris G, Cortés-Acha B, Figueiredo R, Valmaseda-Castellón E - Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal (2016)

Bottom Line: The results showed that the subjects were more critical than reference values, specially concerning prosthetic issues.The differences between groups were more obvious in the case with the best result.Experience and area of expertise seem to influence the evaluation of aesthetics in the anterior region.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Dentistry - University of Barcelona, Campus de Bellvitge UB; Facultat d'Odontologia, C/ Feixa Llarga, s/n, Pavelló Govern, 2 planta, Despatx 2.9, 08907 L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain, rui@ruibf.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Several aesthetic indexes have been described to assess implant aesthetics. The aim of this study was to compare the aesthetic assessment made by dental professionals and students of single-tooth implants placed in the upper incisors.

Materials and methods: A cross-sectional survey study using a subjective questionnaire to assess the aesthetics in 3 implant supported single-tooth cases in the anterior maxilla was performed. The interviewed subjects were divided into 4 groups: dentist with experience in implant treatment, dentists without experience in implants and 3rd and 5th year dental students. The questionnaire consisted of 2 visual analogue scales (VAS) to evaluate aesthetics, the pink esthetic score (PES), the white esthetic score (WES) and the simplified papilla index (PI).

Results: One-hundred dentists and one-hundred dental students filled the aesthetic assessment questionnaire. The results showed that the subjects were more critical than reference values, specially concerning prosthetic issues. The differences between groups were more obvious in the case with the best result. On the other hand, few differences were detected in the remaining cases. Regarding soft tissue and crown features, experienced dentists in implant dentistry were the most demanding. Cronbach's Alpha showed values ≥ 0,8 in the questionnaire in every case, which indicates an adequate reliability.

Conclusions: Dentists and dental students have different opinions when assessing aesthetics of single tooth implant supported cases. Experience and area of expertise seem to influence the evaluation of aesthetics in the anterior region.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Case 3 (Implant in right maxillary central incisor).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4920464&req=5

Figure 3: Case 3 (Implant in right maxillary central incisor).

Mentions: Every participant anonymously filled 3 questionnaires (one for each case) regarding the evaluation of patients with single implant restorations in the anterior maxilla. Two frontal photos (an intraoral view with lip retraction and a picture of the patient’s smile) were provided (Figs. 1-3). Cases were selected so that the first case had the best overall aesthetic result and last patient had the worst outcome, without being an obvious aesthetic failure. The patients’ identity remained confidential and an informed consent was signed allowing using the photos. Approval by an Institutional Review Board was not required since this cross-sectional study was based in a sample of dental professionals and not patients.


Aesthetic perception of single implants placed in the anterior zone. A cross-sectional study.

Burgueño-Barris G, Cortés-Acha B, Figueiredo R, Valmaseda-Castellón E - Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal (2016)

Case 3 (Implant in right maxillary central incisor).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4920464&req=5

Figure 3: Case 3 (Implant in right maxillary central incisor).
Mentions: Every participant anonymously filled 3 questionnaires (one for each case) regarding the evaluation of patients with single implant restorations in the anterior maxilla. Two frontal photos (an intraoral view with lip retraction and a picture of the patient’s smile) were provided (Figs. 1-3). Cases were selected so that the first case had the best overall aesthetic result and last patient had the worst outcome, without being an obvious aesthetic failure. The patients’ identity remained confidential and an informed consent was signed allowing using the photos. Approval by an Institutional Review Board was not required since this cross-sectional study was based in a sample of dental professionals and not patients.

Bottom Line: The results showed that the subjects were more critical than reference values, specially concerning prosthetic issues.The differences between groups were more obvious in the case with the best result.Experience and area of expertise seem to influence the evaluation of aesthetics in the anterior region.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Dentistry - University of Barcelona, Campus de Bellvitge UB; Facultat d'Odontologia, C/ Feixa Llarga, s/n, Pavelló Govern, 2 planta, Despatx 2.9, 08907 L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain, rui@ruibf.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Several aesthetic indexes have been described to assess implant aesthetics. The aim of this study was to compare the aesthetic assessment made by dental professionals and students of single-tooth implants placed in the upper incisors.

Materials and methods: A cross-sectional survey study using a subjective questionnaire to assess the aesthetics in 3 implant supported single-tooth cases in the anterior maxilla was performed. The interviewed subjects were divided into 4 groups: dentist with experience in implant treatment, dentists without experience in implants and 3rd and 5th year dental students. The questionnaire consisted of 2 visual analogue scales (VAS) to evaluate aesthetics, the pink esthetic score (PES), the white esthetic score (WES) and the simplified papilla index (PI).

Results: One-hundred dentists and one-hundred dental students filled the aesthetic assessment questionnaire. The results showed that the subjects were more critical than reference values, specially concerning prosthetic issues. The differences between groups were more obvious in the case with the best result. On the other hand, few differences were detected in the remaining cases. Regarding soft tissue and crown features, experienced dentists in implant dentistry were the most demanding. Cronbach's Alpha showed values ≥ 0,8 in the questionnaire in every case, which indicates an adequate reliability.

Conclusions: Dentists and dental students have different opinions when assessing aesthetics of single tooth implant supported cases. Experience and area of expertise seem to influence the evaluation of aesthetics in the anterior region.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus