Objectives:The primary objective of this study was to assess whether giving postoperative antibiotics to healthy patients after straightforward platform-switched implant placement would influence peri-implant crestal bone levels and postoperative morbidity after 1 year.Methods: Thirty-eight healthy individuals were recruited in this pilot, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. The intervention group (n = 18) received two grams of amoxicillin one hour before implant placement followed by a 7 days postoperative regimen (500 mg tid). The control group (n = 20) took the same preoperative dose of amoxicillin and an identical placebo postoperatively. Mesial and distal peri-implant crestal bone levels were measured at baseline, four months and one year later with standardized periapical radiographs. Postoperative pain severity was assessed through self-administered questionnaires for 7 days. Surgery-associated morbidities were evaluated after one, three, 16 weeks and 1 year. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were used.Results: Thirty-seven participants completed the trial. At the one-year follow-up, the mean combined peri-implant crestal bone changes for the intervention (n = 18) and control (n = 19) groups were -0.44 ± 0.41 mm and -0.27 ± 0.56 mm, respectively.The difference between the groups (intervention-control) for mean combined crestal bone level changes was not statistically significant. There were no significant differences in surgery-associated morbidities between the intervention and control groups.The one-year implant survival rate was 100% in both groups.Conclusions: Study results suggest that a routine postoperative antibiotic regimen for healthy patients undergoing straightforward platform-switched implant placement might not be necessary to prevent postoperative peri-implant bone loss and complications.

Background: Although most people associate smoking with lung cancer and heart disease, few are aware of the impact of smoking on ocular health. Studies have suggested a better knowledge of this association might promote higher quit rates, particularly in teenagers. The purpose of our study was to determine the knowledge of teenagers about the effects of smoking on ocular health and the fear associated with several tobacco-related health conditions. Methods: A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 180 high school students aged 14 to 17 years. Measured variables included socio-economic demographics, smoking status, knowledge of the effects of smoking on general and ocular health, and level of fear as well as level of motivation to quit smoking associated with the following tobacco-related conditions: lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, heart attack, blindness and deafness. Results: Response rate was 100 per cent. Eleven per cent of responders were smokers. The proportion of smokers who thought smoking could cause blindness was 64.3 per cent while it was 13.5 per cent for non-smokers. The proportion of smokers fearing blindness was 30 per cent, as opposed to 69.8 per cent for non-smokers. The proportion of respondents who thought the presented conditions were 'extremely' or 'very good' reasons to quit were similarly high for all smoking-associated conditions. Conclusion: These findings suggest teenagers are unaware of the impact smoking can have on ocular health. Smokers did not seem more concerned about vision loss compared to other tobacco-related diseases, as opposed to non-smokers. Our findings suggest vision loss would be a strong motivator to prevent initiation, but not very effective regarding cessation in this group. However, optometrists should be aware teenagers seem receptive to the message that 'smoking can cause blindness' and use this strategy in order to prevent smoking initiation.