Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté

Attention, ce site est en cours de développement !
Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts.
Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Patient Evaluation of Treatment with Fixed Prostheses Supported by Implants or a Combination of Teeth and Implants

Identifieur interne : 000068 ( Istex/Curation ); précédent : 000067; suivant : 000069

Patient Evaluation of Treatment with Fixed Prostheses Supported by Implants or a Combination of Teeth and Implants

Auteurs : Mats Kronström ; Mats Trulsson ; Björn Söderfeldt

Source :

RBID : ISTEX:014B0349BF8BCA07062BF4F0B95A8CE3E4646B13

English descriptors

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare treatment outcomes among subjects with complete arch fixed prostheses in the maxilla, supported by implants or a combination of natural teeth and dental implants. Materials and Methods: Twenty‐one subjects with maxillary tooth‐ and implant‐supported fixed prostheses and 21 subjects with maxillary implant‐supported fixed prostheses were identified and included in the study. All abutment teeth in the group with tooth‐ and implant‐supported prostheses were provided with cemented copings that incorporated threads for vertical locking screws. Frameworks were fabricated with a gold alloy that was veneered with acrylic resin or ceramic materials. All frameworks were screw‐retained to implants and copings. Frameworks in the group with implant‐supported prostheses were fabricated with milled titanium or gold alloy to which denture teeth and resin base material were applied. All prostheses had a minimum of 8 units, at least 4 of which were in one quadrant. Subjects in both groups were mailed a questionnaire consisting of 15 questions focused on various factors related to treatment outcome, such as oral function and patient satisfaction. Results: The response rate was 86%. Both groups reported a high satisfaction rate for most items with few regretting their choice of treatment. Most individuals in both groups reported great improvement in chewing ability and few reported phonetic disturbances. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups. Conclusion: The results of the present study showed similarity in questionnaire responses between the 2 groups of participants. High satisfaction was reported both among subjects who received a complete arch fixed prosthesis in the maxilla supported by dental implants only, as well as among those whose prostheses were supported by a combination of natural teeth and dental implants.

Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2004.04027.x

Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)


Links to Exploration step

ISTEX:014B0349BF8BCA07062BF4F0B95A8CE3E4646B13

Le document en format XML

<record>
<TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title xml:lang="en">Patient Evaluation of Treatment with Fixed Prostheses Supported by Implants or a Combination of Teeth and Implants</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Kronstrom, Mats" sort="Kronstrom, Mats" uniqKey="Kronstrom M" first="Mats" last="Kronström">Mats Kronström</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Trulsson, Mats" sort="Trulsson, Mats" uniqKey="Trulsson M" first="Mats" last="Trulsson">Mats Trulsson</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Soderfeldt, Bjorn" sort="Soderfeldt, Bjorn" uniqKey="Soderfeldt B" first="Björn" last="Söderfeldt">Björn Söderfeldt</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:014B0349BF8BCA07062BF4F0B95A8CE3E4646B13</idno>
<date when="2004" year="2004">2004</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1532-849X.2004.04027.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/014B0349BF8BCA07062BF4F0B95A8CE3E4646B13/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000068</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000068</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">000068</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<biblStruct>
<analytic>
<title level="a" type="main">Patient Evaluation of Treatment with Fixed Prostheses Supported by Implants or a Combination of Teeth and Implants</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Kronstrom, Mats" sort="Kronstrom, Mats" uniqKey="Kronstrom M" first="Mats" last="Kronström">Mats Kronström</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Trulsson, Mats" sort="Trulsson, Mats" uniqKey="Trulsson M" first="Mats" last="Trulsson">Mats Trulsson</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Soderfeldt, Bjorn" sort="Soderfeldt, Bjorn" uniqKey="Soderfeldt B" first="Björn" last="Söderfeldt">Björn Söderfeldt</name>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series>
<title level="j" type="main">Journal of Prosthodontics</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS</title>
<idno type="ISSN">1059-941X</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1532-849X</idno>
<imprint>
<biblScope unit="vol">13</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="160">160</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="165">165</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">6</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace> 350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK . </pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2004-09">2004-09</date>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">1059-941X</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt>
<idno type="ISSN">1059-941X</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc>
<textClass>
<keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en">
<term>Abutment</term>
<term>Abutment teeth</term>
<term>Clin</term>
<term>Complete arch</term>
<term>Dental implants</term>
<term>Denture</term>
<term>Edentulous</term>
<term>Edentulous jaws</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Maxilla</term>
<term>Maxillary</term>
<term>Maxillary prostheses</term>
<term>Natural roots</term>
<term>Natural teeth</term>
<term>Oral function</term>
<term>Osseointegrated implants</term>
<term>Patient satisfaction</term>
<term>Periodontal</term>
<term>Periodontal mechanoreceptors</term>
<term>Phonetic disturbances</term>
<term>Present study</term>
<term>Prosthesis</term>
<term>Prosthodontic treatment</term>
<term>Range years</term>
<term>Tisp</term>
<term>Tisp group</term>
<term>Treatment outcome</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en">
<term>Abutment</term>
<term>Abutment teeth</term>
<term>Clin</term>
<term>Complete arch</term>
<term>Dental implants</term>
<term>Denture</term>
<term>Edentulous</term>
<term>Edentulous jaws</term>
<term>Implant</term>
<term>Maxilla</term>
<term>Maxillary</term>
<term>Maxillary prostheses</term>
<term>Natural roots</term>
<term>Natural teeth</term>
<term>Oral function</term>
<term>Osseointegrated implants</term>
<term>Patient satisfaction</term>
<term>Periodontal</term>
<term>Periodontal mechanoreceptors</term>
<term>Phonetic disturbances</term>
<term>Present study</term>
<term>Prosthesis</term>
<term>Prosthodontic treatment</term>
<term>Range years</term>
<term>Tisp</term>
<term>Tisp group</term>
<term>Treatment outcome</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front>
<div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare treatment outcomes among subjects with complete arch fixed prostheses in the maxilla, supported by implants or a combination of natural teeth and dental implants. Materials and Methods: Twenty‐one subjects with maxillary tooth‐ and implant‐supported fixed prostheses and 21 subjects with maxillary implant‐supported fixed prostheses were identified and included in the study. All abutment teeth in the group with tooth‐ and implant‐supported prostheses were provided with cemented copings that incorporated threads for vertical locking screws. Frameworks were fabricated with a gold alloy that was veneered with acrylic resin or ceramic materials. All frameworks were screw‐retained to implants and copings. Frameworks in the group with implant‐supported prostheses were fabricated with milled titanium or gold alloy to which denture teeth and resin base material were applied. All prostheses had a minimum of 8 units, at least 4 of which were in one quadrant. Subjects in both groups were mailed a questionnaire consisting of 15 questions focused on various factors related to treatment outcome, such as oral function and patient satisfaction. Results: The response rate was 86%. Both groups reported a high satisfaction rate for most items with few regretting their choice of treatment. Most individuals in both groups reported great improvement in chewing ability and few reported phonetic disturbances. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups. Conclusion: The results of the present study showed similarity in questionnaire responses between the 2 groups of participants. High satisfaction was reported both among subjects who received a complete arch fixed prosthesis in the maxilla supported by dental implants only, as well as among those whose prostheses were supported by a combination of natural teeth and dental implants.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000068 | SxmlIndent | more

Ou

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 000068 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Santé
   |area=    EdenteV2
   |flux=    Istex
   |étape=   Curation
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     ISTEX:014B0349BF8BCA07062BF4F0B95A8CE3E4646B13
   |texte=   Patient Evaluation of Treatment with Fixed Prostheses Supported by Implants or a Combination of Teeth and Implants
}}

Wicri

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32.
Data generation: Thu Nov 30 15:26:48 2017. Site generation: Tue Mar 8 16:36:20 2022