ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Safer and faster: evaluation of a dental implant checklist.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSystematic safety approaches, remain largely unevaluated in dental implantology. This prospective interventional study aimed to evaluate the impact of a structured surgical safety checklist on clinical incidents and organizational efficiency in dental implant surgery.
methodsA before-and-after study design was implemented at a high-volume center, documenting 124 consecutive dental implant surgeries (61 without, 63 with checklist) using a previously by Kupka et al. developed safety checklist. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of incidents divided into clinical deviations and workflow disruptions; the secondary endpoint was procedure duration.
resultsChecklist implementation resulted in a statistically significant reduction in mean surgery duration. Mean operative time decreased from 75.4 min (SD 31.9) to 60.3 min (SD 31.4), representing a median decrease: 15.0 min (p < 0.01). The rate of surgeries with at least one incident decreased from 36.1% (22/61) to 23.8% (15/63), which was not statistically significant (p = 0.170). However, clinical deviations dropped significantly from 13.1% to 0.0% (p = 0.003).
conclusionTo our knowledge, this is the first study investigating checklist effects on incidents and operating time in implant dentistry, and the largest case number in oral surgery. Introducing a surgical checklist significantly improved efficiency by reducing procedure duration. While the reduction in overall incidents was not statistically significant, the elimination of clinical deviations suggests a safety benefit. Structured checklists might be a valuable tool to enhance patient safety and operational workflow in elective implant surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.