Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
An analysis of the decision-making process for single implant treatment in general practice
Show others and affiliations
2012 (English)In: Journal of Clinical Periodontology, ISSN 0303-6979, E-ISSN 1600-051X, Vol. 39, no 2, p. 166-172Article in journal (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Purpose To study the frequency of and factors associated with the decision to perform single implant treatment after tooth extraction by general practitioners in a private, fee-for-service setting. Material and methods One hundred practitioners with a general dental practice in Ghent were randomly selected. Clinicians were asked to fill in a study form for every single extraction they performed during an 8-week period. The form related to the treatment decision and a number of patient- and clinician-related factors. Results Ninety-four general dentists (52 men, 42 women; mean age 49; range 24–68) agreed to participate and extracted 1180 single teeth. After exclusion of third molars and cases where the reason for tooth loss would generally prohibit replacement, 900 cases were identified. In 24% of these patients, there was no treatment decision and in 18% replacement was deemed unnecessary. When replacement was necessary (n = 526), removable partial denture (RPD), fixed partial denture (FPD), single implant treatment and resin-bonded bridge were chosen in 54%, 24%, 21% and 1% of the patients, respectively. Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate the decision-making process for single implant treatment against RPD and FPD. In relation to RPD, single implant treatment was more likely in highly educated patients with few missing teeth and no bone loss at adjacent teeth. In relation to FPD, single implant treatment was more likely in patients with intact adjacent teeth and when the tooth was extracted by a female dentist. Experience in implant prosthetics was positively associated with single implant treatment in all analyses. Conclusions Single implant treatment is not the most common procedure in daily practice to restore a single tooth gap. Patient's education, oral factors and clinician-related factors may affect the decision-making process, whereas medical factors may not.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Vol. 39, no 2, p. 166-172
Keywords [en]
decision-making, dental implant, extraction, general practice, single tooth
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-15633DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01804.xISI: 000299070000008PubMedID: 22092723Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84855896186Local ID: 17540OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-15633DiVA, id: diva2:1419155
Available from: 2020-03-30 Created: 2020-03-30 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 30 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf