Subjektivne mere ishoda i klinička evaluacija terapije dentalnim implantatima kod starije populacije – studija preseka
Sažetak
Uvod/Cilj. Poremećaj oralnog zdravlja je od značaja za opšte zdravlje i kvalitet života starijih osoba. Cilj studije preseka bio je da se procene klinički parametri i subjektivne mere ocene dugogodišnje terapije dentalnim implantatima, primenjene kod bezubih i krezubih osoba starijih od 65 godina. Metode. Ukupno, 38 ispitanika sa 168 implantata bilo je uključeno u studiju preseka i podvrgnuto kliničkom i radiološkom pregledu. Stopa preživljavanja implantata, stopa gubitka implantata i druge komplikacije praćene su i analizirane. Svi ispitanici su popunjavali upitnik Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) i odgovarali na pitanja uz korišćenje Vizuelno analogne skale (VAS) koja su se odnosila na njihovo iskustvo i zadovoljstvo celokupnom implantološkom terapijom. Univarijantni i multivarijantni regresioni modeli korišćeni su za proveru korelacije između uticaja implantološke terapije na kvalitet života i zadovoljstvo pacijenata terapijom. Rezultati. Stopa preživljavanja implantata bila je 94,3%. Zastupljenost implantata bez komplikacija iznosila je 73,2% (123), dok su se biološke i tehničke komplikacije dogodile kod 17,3% (29) i 9,5% (16) implantata, redom. U odnosu na kvalitet života, statistički značajna razlika pronađena je samo kod poređenja grupa sa mobilim i fiksnim zubnim nadoknadama (p = 0,001). Multivarijantni regresioni model pokazao je da je stepen zadovoljstva oblikom i veličinom zubnih nadoknada značajno povezan sa nižim ukupnim skorom OHIP-14 upitnika, što ukazuje na bolji kvalitet života. Zaključak. Na osnovu dobijenih rezultata može se zaključiti da se terapija dentalnim implantatima kod osoba starije životne dobi može smatrati predvidivim dugoročnim terapijskim izborom s obzirom na visoku stopu preživljavanja implantata, minimalne komplikacije, kao i statistički značajno bolji kvalitet života ustanovljen u grupi sa fiksnim protetskim nadoknadama.
Reference
World Health Organization (WHO). Active Ageing: A Policy Framework. A Contribution of the World Health Organiza-tion to the Second United Nations World Assembly on Age-ing. Madrid, Spain: World Health Organization (WHO; 2002.
Kowal P, Goodkind D, He W, An Aging World: 2015. Interna-tional Population Reports. Washington DC: U.S. Govern-ment Printing Office; 2016. Available from: http://www.census.gov/library/publications/2016/demo/P95-16-1.html
Murray Thomson W. Epidemiology of oral health conditions in older people. Gerodontology 2014; 31 Suppl 1: 9‒16.
Muller F, Naharro M, Carlsson GE. What are the prevalence and incidence of tooth loss in the adult and elderly population in Europe? Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18 Suppl 3: 2‒14.
Heydecke G, Thomason JM, Lund JP, Feine JS. The impact of conventional and implant supported prostheses on social and sexual activities in edentulous adults: Results from a random-ized trial 2 months after treatment. J Dent 2005; 33(8): 649‒57.
Geissler CA, Bates JF. The nutritional effects of tooth loss. Am J Clin Nutr 1984; 39(3): 478‒89.
Jemt T. Implant treatment in elderly patients. Int J Prostho-dont 1993; 6(5): 456‒61.
Kondell PA, Nordenram A, Landt H. Titanium implants in the treatment of edentulousness: influence of patient’s age on prognosis. Gerodontics 1988; 4(6): 280‒4.
Zarb GA, Schmitt A. Osseointegration for elderly patients: The Toronto study. J Prosthet Dent 1994; 72(5): 559‒68.
Park JC, Baek WS, Choi SH, Cho KS, Jung UW. Long-term outcomes of dental implants placed in elderly patients: a retro-spective clinical and radiographic analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017; 28(2): 186‒91.
De Bruyn H, Raes S, Matthys C, Cosyn J. The current use of pa-tient-centered/reported outcomes in implant dentistry: a sys-tematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015; 26 Suppl 1: 45‒56.
Reissmann DR, Dard M, Lamprecht R, Struppek J, Heydecke G. Oral health-related quality of life in subjects with implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review. J Dent 2017; 65: 22‒40.
World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declara-tion of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involv-ing human subjects. JAMA 2013; 310(20): 2191‒4.
Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986; 1(1): 11‒25.
Mombelli A, van Oosten MA, Schurch E Jr, Land NP. The micro-biota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated tita-nium implants. Oral Microbiol Immunol 1987; 2(4): 145‒51.
Slade GD. Derivation and validation of a short-form oral health impact profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1997; 25(4): 284‒90.
Stancic I, Sojic LT, Jelenkovic A. Adaptation of Oral Health Im-pact Profile (OHIP-14) index for measuring impact of oral health on quality of life in elderly to Serbian language. Vojno-sanit Pregl 2009; 66(7): 511‒5. (Serbian)
Rashid F, Awad MA, Thomason JM, Piovano A, Spielberg GP, Scil-ingo E, et al. The effectiveness of 2-implant overdentures - a pragmatic international multicentre study. J Oral Rehabil 2011; 38(3): 176‒84.
Becker W, Hujoel P, Becker BE, Wohrle P. Dental Implants in an Aged Population: Evaluation of Periodontal Health, Bone Loss, Implant Survival, and Quality of Life. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016; 18(3): 473‒9.
Serino G, Ström C. Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous pa-tients: Association with inadequate plaque control. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20(2): 169‒74.
Allen P, McMillan A. A longitudinal study of quality of life outcomes in older adults requesting implants prostheses and complete removable dentures. Clin Oral Implant Res 2003; 14(2): 173‒9.
De Bruyn H, Raes S, Matthys C, Cosyn J. The current use of pa-tient-centered/reported outcomes in implant dentistry: A sys-tematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015; 26(Suppl 11): 45‒56.
Awad MA, Feine JS. Measuring patient satisfaction with man-dibular prostheses. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998; 26(6): 400‒5.