Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29907931›Full record

Observational studyClinical oral investigations2019

Influence of 2D vs 3D imaging and professional experience on dental implant treatment planning.

João Henrique Fortes, Christiano de Oliveira-Santos, Wilson Matsumoto, Raphael Jurca Gonçalves da Motta, Camila Tirapelli

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Dynamic Navigation in Dental Implantology.Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

João Henrique FortesDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, 14040-904, Brazil.
Christiano de Oliveira-SantosDepartament of Stomatology, Public Health, and Forensic Dentistry, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, 14040-904, Brazil.
Wilson MatsumotoDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, 14040-904, Brazil.
Raphael Jurca Gonçalves da MottaDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, 14040-904, Brazil.
Camila TirapelliDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, 14040-904, Brazil. catirapelli@forp.usp.br.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study investigated whether professional experience and type of image examination (panoramic radiography (PAN) or cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)) could influence the pre-surgical planning for dental implant treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsSix dentists, from two different levels of experience (senior (Sr) and junior (Jr)) performed simulated pre-surgical planning by using PANs and after 1 month, by using CBCTs, considering implant length (IL), implant width (IW), need for bone graft (BG), and other surgical procedures (OP). Bland-Altman test and Kappa coefficient were used to identify agreements.

resultsBland-Altman test showed good agreement in the plans for inter-professional (i.e., Sr vs Jr) comparisons. Bland-Altman plots displayed intra-observer agreement (i.e., differences between PAN and CBCT), showing discrepancy between imaging modalities for IL and a tendency towards selecting larger dental implant options when using PAN and smaller options with CBCT. Kappa showed almost perfect (0.81-1.0) agreement between Jr and Sr for OP (PAN and CBCT). For BG, agreement was substantial (0.61-0.80) when planning was done with PAN and CBCT. Descriptive statistics showed evidence that when Jrs used CBCT, they no longer indicated the BG they had planned when they used PAN.

conclusionThere were differences in the pre-surgical planning for treatment with dental implants depending on the professional experience and the type of imaging examination used. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Variation in dental implant planning can affect treatment time, cost, and morbidity in patients.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceDental Implantation, EndosseousAdultCone-Beam Computed TomographyFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMalePatient Care PlanningRadiography, PanoramicCone beam tomographyDental implantsDigital dentistryProfessional experienceTreatment plan

Identifiers

PMID29907931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.