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
. 2023 Nov 22;23(1):908.
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03658-9.

Heterogeneity of outcomes in randomized controlled trials on implant prosthodontic therapy is hindering comparative effectiveness research: meta-research study

Ante Vardić  1 , Livia Puljak  2 , Tea Galić  3 , Joško Viskić  4 , Ena Kuliš  1 , Tina Poklepović Peričić  3
Affiliations

Heterogeneity of outcomes in randomized controlled trials on implant prosthodontic therapy is hindering comparative effectiveness research: meta-research study

Ante Vardić et al. BMC Oral Health. .

Abstract

Background: Consistency in outcomes across clinical trials allows for comparing and combining results from different studies. A core outcome set (COS), representing a minimally agreed standardized group of outcomes that should be monitored and measured through research in a specific field of medicine, is not yet available for trials in implant prosthodontic (dental implant) therapy. This meta-research study aimed to analyze outcomes used in clinical trials on implant prosthodontic therapy.

Methods: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group (COHG) register to identify systematic reviews of interventions in implant prosthodontic therapy published by October 2023. From the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the relevant reviews, we extracted data on the characteristics of the included trials and the outcomes used. We categorized outcomes into domains.

Results: From 182 systematic reviews in the COHG register, we included 11 systematic reviews on dental implant therapy. The reviews included 117 unique RCTs with 4725 participants, published from 1995 to 2020, which analyzed 74 different outcomes. Using different definitions, implant failure was analyzed in 73 RCTs. Seventeen RCTs did not define implant failure. Failure was most often (30 RCTs) followed up for one year. Only one RCT assessed implant failure after five years. Trials used 17 definitions of implant failure, while 17 trials did not report on the criteria of implant failure. Complications were analyzed in 48 RCTs, although they were not clearly defined in 12 RCTs. Failure of prosthodontic supra-structure was analyzed in 74 RCTs, with definitions of failure and criteria not clearly defined in 44 RCTs. Trials considered adverse events, peri-implant tissue health, patient attitudes, and other outcomes, including cost, aesthetics, or procedure duration. These outcomes were often different between trials. Twenty-six outcomes were used only once per study.

Conclusions: Clinical trials in implant prosthodontics used different outcomes, different definitions of outcomes and used different times to monitor them. Standardization of outcomes is necessary to allow comparability and evidence synthesis about the effectiveness of implant prosthodontic therapy.

Keywords: Core outcomes; Implant prosthodontics; Meta-research; Randomized controlled trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram. Acronyms: COHG = Cochrane Oral Health Group; SR = systematic review
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Alghamdi HS, Jansen JA. The development and future of dental implants. Dent Mater J. 2020;39(2):167–72. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2019-140. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hartlev J, Kohberg P, Ahlmann S, Andersen NT, Schou S, Isidor F. Patient satisfaction and esthetic outcome after immediate placement and provisionalization of single-tooth implants involving a definitive individual abutment. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(11):1245–50. doi: 10.1111/clr.12260. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jofre J, Castiglioni X, Lobos CA. Influence of minimally invasive implant-retained overdenture on patients’ quality of life: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(10):1173–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02529.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shemtov-Yona K, Rittel D. An overview of the Mechanical Integrity of Dental Implants. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:547384. doi: 10.1155/2015/547384. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Esposito M, Hirsch JM, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (I). Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106(1):527–51. doi: 10.1046/j.0909-8836..t01-2-.x. - DOI - PubMed

Substances

LinkOut - more resources