Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33628810›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2021

Patient Satisfaction with Implant-Supported Monolithic and Partially Veneered Zirconia Restorations.

Paolo De Angelis, Giulio Gasparini, Edoardo Rella, Silvio De Angelis, Cristina Grippaudo, Antonio D'Addona, Paolo Francesco Manicone

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paolo De AngelisDepartment of Head and Neck, Division of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS-Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0310-0037
Giulio GaspariniDepartment of Head and Neck, Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS-Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5091-5178
Edoardo RellaDepartment of Head and Neck, Division of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS-Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Silvio De AngelisPrivate Dental Practice, Ascoli Piceno, Italy.
Cristina GrippaudoDepartment of Head and Neck, Division of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS-Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Antonio D'AddonaDepartment of Head and Neck, Division of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS-Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Paolo Francesco ManiconeDepartment of Head and Neck, Division of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS-Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The digital workflow and the application of Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM) to prosthodontics present the clinician with the possibility of adopting new materials that confer several advantages. Especially in the case of zirconia, these innovations have profoundly changed daily practice. This paper compares the satisfaction and perception of patients who received implant-supported single crowns (SC) and fixed partial dentures (FPD) made from zirconia, either monolithic or partially veneered, after 3 years of follow-up; the success and survival rate of these restorations were also measured. Forty patients, who had been previously treated with implant-supported SC or FPD, either monolithic or partially veneered, and submitted to a yearly maintenance program, were recalled 3 years after their treatment and requested to complete an 8-question questionnaire regarding their perceptions of the treatment. Any mechanical or biological complication that had occurred from the time of delivery was also recorded. Patients that experienced ≥1 complication were less likely to be prone to repeat the treatment. The 3-year success rate was 92.6% for monolithic restoration and 92.3% for partially veneered restoration, while the survival rate was 100% for both restorations. The 3-year follow-up found that monolithic and partially veneered zirconia restorations are both well-accepted treatment options, and patients preferred the veneered restorations (0.76,

Indexed as

CrownsDental PorcelainDental Prosthesis DesignDenture, Partial, FixedPatient SatisfactionSurveys and QuestionnairesZirconiumEstheticsFemaleHumansMaleDental PorcelainZirconiumzirconium oxide

Identifiers

PMID33628810
PMCPMC7884129
OpenAlexW3127905220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.