患者报告的结局测量指标侧重于种植体支持的单冠与牙支持的单冠的美学效果——系统评价和荟萃分析。
Patient-reported outcome measures focusing on the esthetics of implant-compared to tooth-supported single crowns-A systematic review and meta-analysis.
机构信息
Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
出版信息
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023 Jun;35(4):632-645. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12983. Epub 2022 Dec 7.
OBJECTIVES
To report a summary of published patient-reported esthetic outcome measures (PROMs) of implant-supported single crowns (SCs) compared with those of tooth-supported SCs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cochrane, Medline (PubMed), and EMBASE database search was performed by three reviewers on reports with patient-reported esthetic outcomes of tooth- and implant-supported SCs. Clinical studies with at least 12 months of mean follow-up period and a minimum of 10 patients, and English, French, or German reports were included. To compare the subgroups, for aggregate-level data, random-effects meta-regression was used.
RESULTS
Two thousand fifteen titles were identified (initial search) and screened independently concluding 53 full-text articles to include in data extraction. Twenty-two studies with 29 study cohorts were included. Patients were satisfied with the esthetics of implant- and tooth- supported crowns Mean visual analogue scale (VAS) value from the PROMs data of 1270 implant-supported SCs evaluated by 1051 patients was 89.6% (80.0%-94.1%). The mean VAS value of patients (n = 201), who evaluated the esthetic outcome of 486 tooth-supported SCs was 94.4% (92.3%-96.0%). VAS scores of patients regarding their perception of esthetics did not show any difference among different crown materials or type of implant used. The patients' perception of esthetics focusing on SC had a tendency to be higher when the crowns were supported by teeth, however, no statistical difference was found when compared with implant-supported crowns (p = 0.067).
CONCLUSIONS
Patient perception of esthetics in SCs was not affected by the type of support, crown material, implant, and presence of provisional crown for both implant- and tooth-supported SCs.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Despite that patient's expectations are increasing overall Patients are satisfied with with esthetic outcome of implant- and tooth-supported crowns.
目的
报告已发表的关于种植体支持的单冠（SCs）与牙支持的SCs 的患者报告美学结果测量（PROMs）的摘要。
材料与方法
三位评论员对有关牙支持和种植体支持SCs 的患者报告美学结果的报告进行了 Cochrane、Medline（PubMed）和 EMBASE 数据库检索。纳入了具有至少 12 个月平均随访期和至少 10 名患者的临床研究，且报告语言为英语、法语或德语。为了进行亚组比较，对于汇总数据，使用了随机效应荟萃回归。
结果
共确定了 2015 个标题（初始搜索）并进行了独立筛选，最终纳入 53 篇全文文章进行数据提取。纳入了 22 项研究的 29 个研究队列。患者对种植体和牙支持冠的美学效果感到满意。从 1051 名患者对 1270 个种植体支持的SCs 的 PROMs 数据评估的平均视觉模拟量表（VAS）值为 89.6%（80.0%-94.1%）。对 486 个牙支持的SCs 的美学结果进行评估的 201 名患者的平均 VAS 值为 94.4%（92.3%-96.0%）。不同冠材料或使用的种植体类型对患者对美学的感知没有任何影响。当关注SCs 的美学时，患者的感知倾向于牙支持的SCs 更高，但与种植体支持的SCs 相比，没有发现统计学差异（p=0.067）。
结论
对于种植体和牙支持的SCs，患者对美学的感知不受支持类型、冠材料、种植体和临时冠的影响。
临床意义
尽管患者的期望总体上在增加，但他们对种植体和牙支持的SCs 的美学效果感到满意。
Zotero 插件