A Cross-Sectional Study of Iraqi Patients to Determine the Degree of Satisfaction with Dental Implants
Abstract
Background: Although the last decade in Iraq has seen a significant increase in patients seeking both governmental and private dental centres for the purpose of undergoing dental implant procedures, most studies have focused solely on examining the impact of treatment on those who have already undergone the procedure.
Objective: Our paper presents a cross-sectional study that examines the assessment outcomes of patient satisfaction with dental implants.
Patients and methods: The study analysed the clinical and demographic characteristics of patients who received dental implants via databases. Using SPSS, we analysed the data and grouped the 93 cases using K-nearest neighbour and linear regression models. The patients included both male and female genders and were between the ages of 30-60 that including from many Iraqi hospitals between 16th Jun 2022 to 25th March 2023. For patients who underwent delayed or immediate implants, we recorded all dental implant outcomes in databases and analyzed the cumulative survival rate in months.
Results and Discussion Our findings identified age as a significant risk factor, with most patients who underwent dental implants being above 50 years old. Gum disease was the most common cause for dental implants (33.4%), followed by tooth decay (22.6%) and other causes. In the long term, smoking significantly impacts patients, with 54.8% being smokers and 45.2% non-smokers. Our results indicate that the complication rate after dental implantation was 16.2%, with infection being the highest risk factor for post-surgery patients. This had an impact on survival rates, which remained stable for patients who underwent delayed implants for the first 80 months. However, patients who received immediate implants experienced a drop in survival rates during the last 70 months.
Conclusion Our study has found that delayed implants yield greater patient satisfaction and better aesthetic results compared to immediate implants.
References
2. He W, Goodkind D, Kowal P. An Aging World: 2015 International Population Reports. Int Popul Reports. 2016; (March).
3. Thomson WM. Epidemiology of oral health conditions in older people. Gerodontology. 2014; 31:9-16.
4. Muller F, Naharro M, Carlsson GE. What are the prevalence and incidence of tooth loss in the adult and elderly population in Europe? Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007;18 Suppl 3:2-14.
5. Heydecke G, Thomason JM, Lund JP, Feine JS. The impact of conventional and implant supported prostheses on social and sexual activities in edentulous adults: Results from a randomized trial two months after treatment. J Dent. 2005;33 (8):649- 657.
6. Geissler CA, Bates JF. The nutritional effects of tooth loss. Am J Clin Nutr. 1984;39 (3):478-489.
7. Jemt T. Implant treatment in elderly patients. Int J Prosthodont. 1993;6 (5):456-461.
8. Kondell PA, Nordenram A, Landt H. Titanium implants in the treatment of edentulousness: influence of patient’s age on prognosis. Gerodontics. 1988;4 (6):280-284.
9. Zarb GA, Schmitt A. Osseointegration for elderly patients: The Toronto study. J Prosthet Dent. 1994;72 (5):559-568.
10. Park J, Baek W, Choi S, Cho K. Long-term outcomes of dental implants placed in elderly patients: a retrospective clinical and radiographic analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28 (2):186-191.
11. De Bruyn H, Raes S, Matthys C, Cosyn J. The current use of patient-centered/reported outcomes in implant dentistry: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26 Suppl 1:45-56.
12. Reissmann DR, Dard M, Lamprecht R, Struppek J, Heydecke G. Oral health-related quality of life in subjects with implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review. J Dent. 2017; 65:22-40.
13. World Medical Association, Review C, Communication S, Principles G. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Jama. 2013;310 (20):2191.
14. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986;1 (1):11-25.
15. Mombelli A, Oosten MAC, Schürch E, Lang NP. The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1987;2 (4):145-151.
16. Slade GD. Derivation and validation of a short-form oral health impact profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997;25 (4):284-290.
17. Stancic I, Sojic LT, Jelenkovic A. [Adaptation of Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) index for measuring the impact of oral health on quality of life in elderly to Serbian language]. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2009;66 (7):511-515.
18. Rashid F, Awad MA, Thomason JM, et al. The effectiveness of 2-implant overdentures - a pragmatic international multicentre study. J Oral Rehabil. 2011;38 (3):176-184.
19. Becker W, Hujoel P, Becker BE, Wohrle P. Dental Implants in an Aged Population: Evaluation of Periodontal Health, Bone Loss, Implant Survival, and Quality of Life. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016;18 (3):473-479.
20. Serino G, Ström C. Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous patients: Association with inadequate plaque control. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20 (2):169-174. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01627. x.
21. Allen P, McMillan A. A longitudinal study of quality-of-life outcomes in older adults requesting implants, prostheses, and complete removable dentures. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2003; 14:173-179
22. Felice P., Zucchelli G., Cannizzaro G., Barausse C., Diazzi M., Trullenque-Eriksson A., Esposito M. Immediate, immediate-delayed (6 weeks) and delayed (4 months) post-extractive single implants: 4-month post-loading data from a randomised controlled trial. Eur. J. Oral Implantol. 2016; 9:233–247.
23. Tonetti M.S., Cortellini P., Graziani F., Cairo F., Lang N.P., Abundo R., Conforti G.P., Marquardt S., Rasperini G., Silvestri M., et al. Immediate versus delayed implant placement after anterior single tooth extraction: The timing randomized controlled clinical trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2017; 44:215–224.
24. Grunder U., Polizzi G., Goené R., Hatano N., Henry P., Jackson W.J., Kawamura K., Köhler S., Renouard F., Rosenberg R., et al. A 3-year prospective multicenter follow-up report on the immediate and delayed-immediate placement of implants. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 1999; 14:210–216.
25. Palattella P., Torsello F., Cordaro L. Two-year prospective clinical comparison of immediate replacement vs. immediate restoration of a single tooth in the esthetic zone. Clin. Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19:1148–1153.
26. Peñarrocha-Oltra D., Demarchi C.L., Maestre-Ferrín L., Peñarrocha-Diago M., Peñarrocha-Diago M. Comparison of immediate and delayed implants in the maxillary molar region: A retrospective study of 123 implants. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2012; 27:604–610.
27. Zafiropoulos G.G., Deli G., Bartee B.K., Hoffmann O. Single-tooth implant placement and loading in fresh and regenerated extraction sockets. Five-year results: A case series using two different implant designs. J. Periodontol. 2010; 81:604–615.
28. Mello C.C., Lemos C.A.A., Verri F.R., Dos Santos D.M., Goiato M.C., Pellizzer E.P. Immediate implant placement into fresh extraction sockets versus delayed implants into healed sockets: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2017; 46:1162–1177.
