Next Issue
Volume 3, June
Previous Issue
Volume 2, December
 
 

Dent. J., Volume 3, Issue 1 (March 2015) – 3 articles , Pages 1-23

  • Issues are regarded as officially published after their release is announced to the table of contents alert mailing list.
  • You may sign up for e-mail alerts to receive table of contents of newly released issues.
  • PDF is the official format for papers published in both, html and pdf forms. To view the papers in pdf format, click on the "PDF Full-text" link, and use the free Adobe Reader to open them.
Order results
Result details
Section
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
650 KiB  
Article
Six-Year Survival and Early Failure Rate of 2918 Implants with Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Enossal Surfaces
by Olivier Le Gac and Ueli Grunder
Dent. J. 2015, 3(1), 15-23; https://doi.org/10.3390/dj3010015 - 05 Feb 2015
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 8328
Abstract
The aim of this chart review was to obtain an objective, quantitative assessment of the clinical performance of an implant line used in an implantological office setting. Implants with hydrophilic (INICELL) and hydrophobic (TST; both: Thommen Medical AG, Grenchen, Switzerland) enossal surfaces were [...] Read more.
The aim of this chart review was to obtain an objective, quantitative assessment of the clinical performance of an implant line used in an implantological office setting. Implants with hydrophilic (INICELL) and hydrophobic (TST; both: Thommen Medical AG, Grenchen, Switzerland) enossal surfaces were compared and the cumulative implant survival rate was calculated. The data of 1063 patients that received 2918 implants (1337 INICELL, 1581 TST) was included. The average follow up time was 2.1 (1.1–5.4) years for INICELL and 4.5 (1.3–5.9) years for TST implants (Thommen Medical AG, Switzerland). In the reported period 7 implants with INICELL (0.5%) and 23 TST implants (1.5%) failed. This difference was statistically significant. The analysis of cases treated and followed up in a single implantological office for 6 years confirmed the very good clinical outcome that was achieved with both used implant lines. Within the limitations of this retrospective analysis, the overall early failure rate of the hydrophilic implants was significantly lower than that of hydrophobic implants. The use of hydrophilic implants allows the clinician to obtain less early failures, hence the interest of an up-to-date surface for the daily work of an implant practice. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

107 KiB  
Editorial
Acknowledgement to Reviewers of Dentistry Journal in 2014
by Dentistry Journal Editorial Office
Dent. J. 2015, 3(1), 14; https://doi.org/10.3390/dj3010014 - 09 Jan 2015
Viewed by 3592
Abstract
The editors of Dentistry Journal would like to express their sincere gratitude to the following reviewers for assessing manuscripts in 2014:[...] Full article
370 KiB  
Article
Effects of Dental Rehabilitation under General Anesthesia on Children’s Oral-Health-Related Quality of Life: Saudi Arabian Parents’ Perspectives
by Ziad D. Baghdadi and Nazeem Muhajarine
Dent. J. 2015, 3(1), 1-13; https://doi.org/10.3390/dj3010001 - 23 Dec 2014
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 7065
Abstract
Aim: To determine whether dental treatment under general anesthesia (GA) would improve quality of life for children as reported by Saudi Arabian parents using a Parental-Caregivers Perceptions Questionnaire (P-CPQ) and a Family Impact Scale (FIS). Methods: Sixty-six parents completed P-CPQ and FIS scales [...] Read more.
Aim: To determine whether dental treatment under general anesthesia (GA) would improve quality of life for children as reported by Saudi Arabian parents using a Parental-Caregivers Perceptions Questionnaire (P-CPQ) and a Family Impact Scale (FIS). Methods: Sixty-six parents completed P-CPQ and FIS scales four to eight weeks after their children (ages three to ten years) underwent comprehensive dental treatment under GA. Postoperative data were compared with baseline data gathered before GA using paired t-test at the 0.05 level of significance. The responsiveness of the P-CPQ and the FIS and the magnitude of changes in children’s quality of life as a result of dental treatment were determined by calculating the effect size (ES). Cross-sectional construct validity and internal consistency were also examined using the pretreatment scores of the P-CPQ and the FIS scores. Results: The overall P-CPQ and FIS scores showed a significant decrease following treatment, concomitant with large ES in both scales and all their subscales with the exception of social wellbeing, which showed moderate ES (ES 0.59). The greatest relative changes were seen in the oral symptoms (ES 1.81) and the family activity (ES 1.57) subscales. Conclusion: Dental treatment under GA is associated with considerable improvement in children’s quality of life as perceived by Saudi parents. The P-CPQ and the FIS scales are valid and responsive to changes resulting from dental treatment of young children affected by severe childhood caries. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Previous Issue
Next Issue
Back to TopTop