Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to compare patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) of implant-supported fixed complete dentures (IFCDs) and overdentures (IODs). Material and methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched, complemented by manual search. Studies published in English up to November 2016 comparing removable with fixed implant-supported prosthesis on fully edentulous patients were included. The review focused on impact on patients' oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), satisfaction or other patientreported outcomes measures. Results: Of 1,563 initially screened articles, 13 studies including 8 prospective and 5retrospective studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. OHRQoL and patient satisfaction were the most common PROMs. When evaluating the levels of evidence, five of thirteen studies were graded as level III and seven reached level II. The only randomized control trial was rated as Ib. The methods used to evaluate PROMs were heterogeneous among studies, and there was a lack of standardization in the measurements employed. In general, IFCD and IOD showed no significant differences when compared for PROMs, with a slight trend of IFCD being superior to IOD in most included studies. However, conflicting results were observed in many aspects such as chewing function, phonetics-related function, overall satisfaction and aesthetics.Conclusions: Inconsistent results were observed in PROMs when comparing IFCD and IOD for fully edentulous patients. A guideline for standardizing the assessment of PROMs in clinical research is needed in order to produce more meaningful evidence-based information. K E Y W O R D Sdental prosthesis, edentulous, implant-supported, outcome assessment (Health Care), patient satisfaction, patient-reported outcomes measures, personal satisfaction, quality of life This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Objectives The aim of Working Group 3 was to focus on three topics that were assessed using patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs). These topics included the following: (a) the aesthetics of tooth and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses focusing on partially edentulous patients, (b) a comparison of fixed and removable implant‐retained prostheses for edentulous populations, and (c) immediate versus early/conventional loading of immediately placed implants in partially edentate patients. PROMs include ratings of satisfaction and oral health‐related quality of life (QHRQoL), as well as other indicators, that is, pain, general health‐related quality of life (e.g., SF‐36). Materials and methods The Consensus Conference Group 3 participants discussed the findings of the three systematic review manuscripts. Following comprehensive discussions, participants developed consensus statements and recommendations that were then discussed in larger plenary sessions. Following this, any necessary modifications were made and approved. Results Patients were very satisfied with the aesthetics of implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses and the surrounding mucosa. Implant neck design, restorative material, or use of a provisional restoration did not influence patients’ ratings. Edentulous patients highly rate both removable and fixed implant‐supported prostheses. However, they rate their ability to maintain their oral hygiene significantly higher with the removable prosthesis. Both immediate provisionalization and conventional loading receive positive patient‐reported outcomes. Conclusions Patient‐reported outcome measures should be gathered in every clinical study in which the outcomes of oral rehabilitation with dental implants are investigated. PROMs, such as patients’ satisfaction and QHRQoL, should supplement other clinical parameters in our clinical definition of success.

Introduction:The ability of spatial representation is one of the most important competences of an oral surgeon, but also a challenging competence to assess in educational settings. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the impact of a hands-on simulation practice on the development of the Dental Anatomy Spatial Representation Ability (DASRA) of recent dental graduates, using a novel assessment instrument based on CBCT radiographic data. Materials and methods:A novel instrument for the measurement of DASRA for oral surgery was developed, utilising panoramic, sagittal and horizontal slices from 3D radiographic imaging of impacted wisdom teeth. Twenty-one young dentists (nine males and 12 females) were enrolled in this study. After measurement of dentists' perceptual ability (PA), all dentists completed a DASRA drawing test and thereafter practiced surgical extraction on 3D printed models, which were based on actual patients' anatomy. A second DASRA was administered after the hands-on exercise, followed by a feedback survey. Results:A slight increase in DASRA scores was revealed after practicing on models, which however did not reach statistical significance. However, statistically significant decrease in drawing time was observed after hands-on experiences (P < 0.001), while important qualitative improvements were noted, such as dentists' ability to position the mandibular nerve. Dentists perceived 3D printed model as a very effective and efficient manner in planning and practicing of surgical interventions.Conclusions: An instrument for the measurement of DASRA based on 3D radiographic imaging might support educators in the assessment of spatial skills of novice surgeons. Practice on 3D printed, anatomically precise models can benefit dentists on pre-clinical surgical training and has the potential of improving their dental anatomy spatial representation ability. K E Y W O R D S3D printed model, additive manufacturing, dental anatomy spatial representation ability, impacted mandibular third molar, perceptual ability | 333 YAO et Al.