Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Esthetic assessments in implant dentistry: objective and subjective criteria for clinicians and patients


Cosyn, Jan; Thoma, Daniel S; Hämmerle, Christoph H F; De Bruyn, Hugo (2017). Esthetic assessments in implant dentistry: objective and subjective criteria for clinicians and patients. Periodontology 2000, 73(1):193-202.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
4 citations in Web of Science®
1 citation in Scopus®
1 citation in Microsoft Academic
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

13 downloads since deposited on 13 Jan 2017
9 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, further contribution
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:February 2017
Deposited On:13 Jan 2017 10:58
Last Modified:19 Feb 2018 07:32
Publisher:Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
ISSN:0906-6713
OA Status:Green
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12163
PubMed ID:28000279

Download

Download PDF  'Esthetic assessments in implant dentistry: objective and subjective criteria for clinicians and patients'.
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB
View at publisher