This study examined the success rates of single immediate implants and their associated biological, hardware and aesthetic complications. Using a developed search strategy, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on single-unit immediate implants with at least six human participants, a minimum follow-up time of 12 months and published between January 1999 and January 2021 were identified. Data was extracted independently using pre-designed data extraction forms. Information on success rates and associated biological, hardware and aesthetic complications were obtained and assessed. Out of 191 potentially eligible studies, 26 RCTs assessing 1270 patients with a total of 1326 single implants were included and further evaluated. In this review, success rate was reported to be 96.7–100% over a total of 9 studies. However, there was a lack of consensus on a universal success criterion between authors emphasizing the need for agreement. The average follow up was 29 months and most reported complications were aesthetic (63 cases, 4.7%), whilst there were relatively fewer biological, (20 cases, 1.5%), and hardware complications (24 cases, 1.8%). Success rate is an uncommon clinical outcome with 9 out of 26 of the selected RCTs reporting it. In these studies, single immediate implants showed a high success rate with low numbers of biological and hardware complications, and high patient satisfaction with aesthetics were reported in the short-term follow-up of one year.
Background Prescribing medicine is integral to clinical dentistry. Infective endocarditis may be rare but fatal if left untreated. As a result, judicious prescribing of antibiotics should be implemented due to potential. To our knowledge, no Australian study has examined dental students' knowledge and perceptions about antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures. Methods Australian dental students were invited to undertake the survey comprising case vignettes to investigate their medication knowledge. A total of 117 responses were received. The questions were 12 clinically relevant questions and three perception-based questions. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics as well as the chi-squared test. Results The 117 respondents had a mean correct response of 7.34 ± 2.64 (range 3–12 out of 12). Out of 117 students, 89 (76%) answered more than half of the questions correctly. Only three students (3%) answered all the questions correctly. Nearly two-thirds felt that they knew about antibiotic prophylaxis used for dental procedures. Conclusion Most respondents answered more than half, but not all, of the clinical questions correctly. It is crucial to highlight that dental student may never receive any more training on antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) at any point in their future careers. It may be ideal that this issue is addressed at the dental school. One way to target this is to potentially nationalised teaching delivery of dental AMS across Australia.
The aim was to compare referral patterns and treatment provided by specialist Endodontists and Endodontic Registrars. A retrospective review was conducted of the clinical records of the first 25 patients seen by seven private endodontic clinicians and the equivalent number (175) of patients seen by five public sector endodontic clinicians from 1 January 2017. The average age and range of medical co‐morbidities of patients in the public sector were statistically greater. Referred patients and referrers mainly worked in metropolitan Perth. The most frequent reasons for referral in both public and private sectors were to assess and manage non‐painful endodontic pathosis, to manage pain, and to manage calcified canals. There was a wide range of cases referred to both sectors but with similar patterns suggesting that the training of specialists adequately prepares them for private practice. The results also indicate that Endodontists must be proficient in all aspects of the speciality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.