Cargando…

Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia

INTRODUCTION: Implant-supported prostheses are currently the standard treatment for the replacement of missing teeth and deficiencies. Implant restorations can either be screw-retained, cement-retained, or both. The implant retention system type is typically chosen during the treatment plan. The pri...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Makke, Alaa, Homsi, Abdulwahed, Guzaiz, Montaha, Almalki, Abdulrahman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29312451
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/5478371
_version_ 1783278195930300416
author Makke, Alaa
Homsi, Abdulwahed
Guzaiz, Montaha
Almalki, Abdulrahman
author_facet Makke, Alaa
Homsi, Abdulwahed
Guzaiz, Montaha
Almalki, Abdulrahman
author_sort Makke, Alaa
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Implant-supported prostheses are currently the standard treatment for the replacement of missing teeth and deficiencies. Implant restorations can either be screw-retained, cement-retained, or both. The implant retention system type is typically chosen during the treatment plan. The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the frequency of implant restoration retention systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A five-page questionnaire was sent to private institutes, educational institutes, and governmental hospitals that provide dental services. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Prior to distribution, the surveys were proofread and pilot-tested at the Faculty of Dentistry at Umm Al-Qura University. The surveys were mailed to three groups: private institutes, educational institutes, and governmental hospitals. In total, 120 surveys were distributed and 87 surveys were returned, for a response rate of 73%. This included thirty-six surveys (41.4%) from private institutes, twenty-two surveys (25.3%) from educational institutes, and twenty-nine surveys (33.3%) from governmental hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: In general, Astra was cited as the most widely used implant system. In addition, cement-retained restorations were more frequently used than screw-retained restorations. However, dental implant failure was more frequently associated with cement-retained restorations than with screw-retained restorations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5682889
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56828892018-01-08 Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia Makke, Alaa Homsi, Abdulwahed Guzaiz, Montaha Almalki, Abdulrahman Int J Dent Research Article INTRODUCTION: Implant-supported prostheses are currently the standard treatment for the replacement of missing teeth and deficiencies. Implant restorations can either be screw-retained, cement-retained, or both. The implant retention system type is typically chosen during the treatment plan. The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the frequency of implant restoration retention systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A five-page questionnaire was sent to private institutes, educational institutes, and governmental hospitals that provide dental services. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Prior to distribution, the surveys were proofread and pilot-tested at the Faculty of Dentistry at Umm Al-Qura University. The surveys were mailed to three groups: private institutes, educational institutes, and governmental hospitals. In total, 120 surveys were distributed and 87 surveys were returned, for a response rate of 73%. This included thirty-six surveys (41.4%) from private institutes, twenty-two surveys (25.3%) from educational institutes, and twenty-nine surveys (33.3%) from governmental hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: In general, Astra was cited as the most widely used implant system. In addition, cement-retained restorations were more frequently used than screw-retained restorations. However, dental implant failure was more frequently associated with cement-retained restorations than with screw-retained restorations. Hindawi 2017 2017-10-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5682889/ /pubmed/29312451 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/5478371 Text en Copyright © 2017 Alaa Makke et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Makke, Alaa
Homsi, Abdulwahed
Guzaiz, Montaha
Almalki, Abdulrahman
Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia
title Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia
title_full Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia
title_fullStr Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia
title_full_unstemmed Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia
title_short Survey of Screw-Retained versus Cement-Retained Implant Restorations in Saudi Arabia
title_sort survey of screw-retained versus cement-retained implant restorations in saudi arabia
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682889/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29312451
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/5478371
work_keys_str_mv AT makkealaa surveyofscrewretainedversuscementretainedimplantrestorationsinsaudiarabia
AT homsiabdulwahed surveyofscrewretainedversuscementretainedimplantrestorationsinsaudiarabia
AT guzaizmontaha surveyofscrewretainedversuscementretainedimplantrestorationsinsaudiarabia
AT almalkiabdulrahman surveyofscrewretainedversuscementretainedimplantrestorationsinsaudiarabia