Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2004 Aug;15(4):498-503.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01033.x.

Patient experience of, and satisfaction with, delayed-immediate vs. delayed single-tooth implant placement

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Patient experience of, and satisfaction with, delayed-immediate vs. delayed single-tooth implant placement

Lars Schropp et al. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004 Aug.

Abstract

Objectives: Recent investigations have focused on patients' subjective assessment of implant treatment. The aim of this study was to compare the patients' experience of surgical and prosthetic procedures, as well as satisfaction with function and aesthetics following single-tooth replacements mounted to early vs. delayed placed dental implants.

Material and methods: Forty-six patients were treated with a single-tooth implant in the anterior or premolar region. Twenty-three implants were placed on average 10 days after tooth extraction (Im), while 23 implants were placed approximately 3 months after tooth extraction (De). Forty-one patients completed a questionnaire regarding the treatment using visual analog scales (VAS) and check boxes 16-18 months after delivery of the restoration.

Results: In all, 90% of the respondents rated 88 or higher on the VAS regarding satisfaction with the crown. Satisfaction with the restoration in general and the appearance was significantly greater in the Im group than in the De group (96 vs. 93; P<0.02). Assessment of the implant surgery was not significantly different between the delayed-immediate and the delayed group. Approximately 25% of the patients experienced unpleasantness in relation to the prosthetic procedures, and in 8 of 11 cases, impression taking was the cause. When evaluating satisfaction with the overall implant treatment, the VAS scores for the delayed-immediate group were significantly higher than for the delayed group (96 vs. 90; P<0.02).

Conclusion: The patients in the present study were highly satisfied with the outcome of the treatment and experienced it to be without significant unpleasantness irrespective of the treatment concept.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources