Wen Cai, Jiang Rong, Zhang Zhiqiang, Lei Bo, Zhong Yingquan, Zhou Huangjun
Department of Oral Implantology, The Affiliated Stomatology Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Department of VIP Dental Service, The Affiliated Stomatology Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2022 Feb 17;16:427-437. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S351143. eCollection 2022.
Abutment access hole on dental implant crowns may facilitate crown retrieval and reduce cement overflow but present esthetic obstacle for patients. This study aimed to investigate the esthetic evaluation and acceptability of implant crowns with different hole designs from the perspective of patients and dentists.
Anterior and posterior implant zirconia crowns were fabricated into three types: no hole (NH), 1 mm micro hole (MH), and 2.5 mm regular hole (RH). The NH crown was set as the control, and the anterior and posterior crowns with MH and RH were evaluated. The subjects, who were recruited randomly, were comprised of lay patients (n=60) and professional dentists (n=30). All subjects were invited to evaluate the esthetic performance of MH and RH crowns on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), rate them from 0 to 10, state their acceptability of these crowns, and label them as acceptable and unacceptable.
The ANOVA analysis of the VAS esthetic evaluation showed that the size of the hole, the position of the teeth, and the professional background of the subject significantly and independently affected esthetic perception. Crowns with MH in the posterior position had higher esthetic scores and acceptability compared with crowns with RH in the anterior position, and dentists tended to show higher acceptance and better esthetic rating for crowns with holes compared with lay patients.
The hypothesis that patients and dentists hold similar esthetic evaluations or acceptability towards implant crown hole designs was rejected. Lay patients had a lower tolerance for venting holes than dentists. Crowns with 1 mm micro holes were more recommendable than crowns with regular abutment access holes from the point of view of satisfying patients' esthetic needs.
牙种植体冠上的基台接入孔可能有助于牙冠取出并减少粘固剂溢出，但对患者而言存在美观障碍。本研究旨在从患者和牙医的角度调查不同孔设计的种植体冠的美观评价和可接受性。
将前牙和后牙种植氧化锆冠制作成三种类型：无孔（NH）、1毫米微孔（MH）和2.5毫米常规孔（RH）。将NH冠设为对照，对带有MH和RH的前牙和后牙冠进行评价。随机招募的受试者包括普通患者（n = 60）和专业牙医（n = 30）。邀请所有受试者在视觉模拟量表（VAS）上评价MH和RH冠的美观性能，从0到10进行评分，说明他们对这些牙冠的可接受性，并将其标记为可接受和不可接受。
VAS美观评价的方差分析表明，孔的大小、牙齿位置和受试者的专业背景显著且独立地影响美观感知。与前牙位置带有RH的冠相比，后牙位置带有MH的冠具有更高的美观得分和可接受性，并且与普通患者相比，牙医对带孔冠的接受度更高，美观评分也更好。
患者和牙医对种植体冠孔设计持有相似美观评价或可接受性的假设被否定。普通患者对通气孔的耐受性低于牙医。从满足患者美观需求的角度来看，带有1毫米微孔的冠比带有常规基台接入孔的冠更值得推荐。
