A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Patient experience of, and satisfaction with, delayed-immediate vs. delayed single-tooth implant placement. | LitMetric

Objectives: Recent investigations have focused on patients' subjective assessment of implant treatment. The aim of this study was to compare the patients' experience of surgical and prosthetic procedures, as well as satisfaction with function and aesthetics following single-tooth replacements mounted to early vs. delayed placed dental implants.

Material And Methods: Forty-six patients were treated with a single-tooth implant in the anterior or premolar region. Twenty-three implants were placed on average 10 days after tooth extraction (Im), while 23 implants were placed approximately 3 months after tooth extraction (De). Forty-one patients completed a questionnaire regarding the treatment using visual analog scales (VAS) and check boxes 16-18 months after delivery of the restoration.

Results: In all, 90% of the respondents rated 88 or higher on the VAS regarding satisfaction with the crown. Satisfaction with the restoration in general and the appearance was significantly greater in the Im group than in the De group (96 vs. 93; P<0.02). Assessment of the implant surgery was not significantly different between the delayed-immediate and the delayed group. Approximately 25% of the patients experienced unpleasantness in relation to the prosthetic procedures, and in 8 of 11 cases, impression taking was the cause. When evaluating satisfaction with the overall implant treatment, the VAS scores for the delayed-immediate group were significantly higher than for the delayed group (96 vs. 90; P<0.02).

Conclusion: The patients in the present study were highly satisfied with the outcome of the treatment and experienced it to be without significant unpleasantness irrespective of the treatment concept.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01033.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

single-tooth implant
8
tooth extraction
8
patient experience
4
satisfaction
4
experience satisfaction
4
satisfaction delayed-immediate
4
delayed-immediate delayed
4
delayed single-tooth
4
implant placement
4
placement objectives
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!