Oral Health and Society, Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:270-275. doi: 10.1111/clr.13299.
The aim of Working Group 3 was to focus on three topics that were assessed using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). These topics included the following: (a) the aesthetics of tooth and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses focusing on partially edentulous patients, (b) a comparison of fixed and removable implant-retained prostheses for edentulous populations, and (c) immediate versus early/conventional loading of immediately placed implants in partially edentate patients. PROMs include ratings of satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life (QHRQoL), as well as other indicators, that is, pain, general health-related quality of life (e.g., SF-36).
The Consensus Conference Group 3 participants discussed the findings of the three systematic review manuscripts. Following comprehensive discussions, participants developed consensus statements and recommendations that were then discussed in larger plenary sessions. Following this, any necessary modifications were made and approved.
Patients were very satisfied with the aesthetics of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses and the surrounding mucosa. Implant neck design, restorative material, or use of a provisional restoration did not influence patients' ratings. Edentulous patients highly rate both removable and fixed implant-supported prostheses. However, they rate their ability to maintain their oral hygiene significantly higher with the removable prosthesis. Both immediate provisionalization and conventional loading receive positive patient-reported outcomes.
Patient-reported outcome measures should be gathered in every clinical study in which the outcomes of oral rehabilitation with dental implants are investigated. PROMs, such as patients' satisfaction and QHRQoL, should supplement other clinical parameters in our clinical definition of success.
第 3 工作组的目的是集中讨论三个使用患者报告的结局测量(PROM)评估的主题。这些主题包括以下内容:(a)部分无牙患者的牙和种植体支持的固定修复体的美观,(b)无牙人群固定和可摘种植体支持修复体的比较,以及(c)部分无牙患者中即刻和早期/常规植入物负荷的即刻植入物。PROM 包括满意度和口腔健康相关生活质量(QHRQoL)的评分,以及其他指标,如疼痛和一般健康相关生活质量(例如,SF-36)。
共识会议第 3 组参与者讨论了三项系统评价手稿的研究结果。在全面讨论后,参与者制定了共识声明和建议,然后在更大的全体会议上进行了讨论。之后,对任何必要的修改进行了讨论和批准。
患者对种植体支持的固定修复体和周围粘膜的美观非常满意。种植体颈部设计、修复材料或使用临时修复体不会影响患者的评分。无牙患者高度评价可摘和固定种植体支持的修复体。然而,他们认为可摘修复体更能保持口腔卫生。即刻临时修复和常规负荷都获得了积极的患者报告结果。
在研究种植体修复结果的每一项临床研究中,都应收集患者报告的结局测量。PROM,如患者满意度和 QHRQoL,应在我们对成功的临床定义中补充其他临床参数。