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
Esthetic assessments in implant dentistry: objective and subjective criteria for clinicians and patients
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium; Ghent University, Belgium.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5042-2875
University of Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1764-7447
University of Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8280-7347
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD). Ghent University, Belgium.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0200-9546
2017 (English)In: Periodontology 2000, ISSN 0906-6713, E-ISSN 1600-0757, Vol. 73, no 1, p. 193-202Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In recent years the scientific community has shown a clear interest in the esthetic outcome of implant treatment. The present paper provides an overview of the esthetic ratings that have been used in implant dentistry. A distinction can be made between objective evaluations by clinicians and subjective evaluations by patients. The former mainly include: midfacial and interproximal soft‐tissue levels; two‐dimensional/three‐dimensional soft‐tissue alterations; assessment of the color match between the natural dentition, on the one hand, and the peri‐implant tissues and the reconstruction, on the other hand; and ordinal indices, such as the pink and white esthetic score. Patient's needs and judgment may differ from objective indicators of implant success and esthetics. As a result, assessing treatment on the basis of patient‐reported outcomes measures should be considered important. Validated questionnaires have been used that mainly assess the impact of oral health on the overall well‐being of individuals. The esthetic judgment of patients is usually based on nonstandardized questions with varying scoring methods, including visual analog scales, Likert and other category scales and open questions. The heterogeneity in scoring systems between studies may compromise proper comparison of objective and subjective esthetic outcomes between studies and therapeutic concepts.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wiley , 2017. Vol. 73, no 1, p. 193-202
National Category
Odontology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-79349DOI: 10.1111/prd.12163ISI: 000392827600013PubMedID: 28000279Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85006741958OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-79349DiVA, id: diva2:1995992
Available from: 2025-09-08 Created: 2025-09-08 Last updated: 2025-09-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Cosyn, JanThoma, Daniel S.Hämmerle, Christoph H. F.Bruyn, Hugo De
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Periodontology 2000
Odontology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 8 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