Abstract

Background This review aimed to concisely describe the current aesthetic objective indices for a single-implant maxillary anterior crown. The secondary aim was to propose introducing a unified, standardized questionnaire for adequately collecting patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in implant dentistry. Materials and Methods A literature review was conducted using both EMBASE/Ovid and MEDLINE/PubMed databases by combining keywords and Emtree/Mesh terms related to “Esthetics,” “Self-Assessment or Surveys and Questionnaires,” and “Single-Tooth Dental Implants.” Results The most meaningful aesthetic objective indices for single implants in the literature are the Pink Esthetic Score (PES), the Papilla Presence Index (PPI), Peri‐Implant and Crown Index (PICI), PES/White Esthetic Score (PES/WES), the Implant Crown Aesthetic Index (ICAI), and a modified version of the ICAI (mod-ICAI) index. Clearly, PES/WES is still the most widely accepted tool. It is encouraging to observe that there is an increasing tendency in recent years to report PROMs more frequently in the implant dentistry literature. We proposed the implementation of a unified, standardized questionnaire using a self-administered visual analogue scale (VAS) scoring system, which evaluates overall satisfaction, comfort, tooth appearance, gingival appearance, function, and hygiene complexity. This tool should be validated in the oral implantology research context for its regular implementation or further development. Conclusions Conducting qualitative studies among dental implant patients who received few implants or single-tooth implant reconstructions in the aesthetic zone may help dental researchers understand better how to efficiently develop and validate a quantitative instrument. This standard tool would reduce heterogeneity bias by providing comparable data between studies.

Highlights

  • Single missing maxillary teeth in the aesthetic zone are increasingly managed with dental implants, especially in cases where the adjacent teeth are relatively free of disease or damage

  • The prevalence of tooth loss has been decreasing in recent decades [1], up to one-quarter of adults in Western countries are missing at least one anterior tooth [2, 3]. e aetiology of single missing permanent teeth in the aesthetic zone stems from either developmental hypodontia or acquired tooth loss

  • An electronic search was conducted aided by Embase/Ovid and MEDLINE/PubMed databases by combining keywords and Emtree/MeSH terms related to “Esthetics,” “Self-Assessment or Surveys and Questionnaires,” and “Single-Tooth Dental Implants.” e search that supported the literature review was carried out up to July 12, 2020. is was complemented by manual searching the references of relevant studies

Read more

Summary

Review Article

Is review aimed to concisely describe the current aesthetic objective indices for a single-implant maxillary anterior crown. E secondary aim was to propose introducing a unified, standardized questionnaire for adequately collecting patientreported outcome measures (PROMs) in implant dentistry. A literature review was conducted using both EMBASE/Ovid and MEDLINE/PubMed databases by combining keywords and Emtree/Mesh terms related to “Esthetics,” “SelfAssessment or Surveys and Questionnaires,” and “Single-Tooth Dental Implants.”. Is tool should be validated in the oral implantology research context for its regular implementation or further development. Conducting qualitative studies among dental implant patients who received few implants or single-tooth implant reconstructions in the aesthetic zone may help dental researchers understand better how to efficiently develop and validate a quantitative instrument. Conducting qualitative studies among dental implant patients who received few implants or single-tooth implant reconstructions in the aesthetic zone may help dental researchers understand better how to efficiently develop and validate a quantitative instrument. is standard tool would reduce heterogeneity bias by providing comparable data between studies

Introduction
Materials and Methods
Calculation to percentage scale
No discrepancy
Very Uncomfortable
Findings
Very Difficult
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call