Skip to content

Effects of different loading protocol on dental implants placed using osseodensification and conventional drilling protocol.

A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF PROGRESSIVE AND CONVENTIONAL LOADING PROTOCOL ON DENTAL IMPLANTS PLACED USING OSSEODENSIFICATION AND CONVENTIONAL DRILLING PROTOCOL- AN IN-VIVO STUDY - NIL

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2024/09/073785
Enrollment
84
Registered
2024-09-11
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-09-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: K069- Disorder of gingiva and edentulousalveolar ridge, unspecified

Interventions

Intervention1: progressive loading: Temporary crowns on the implants placed will be loaded progressively using step up temporaries Control Intervention1: Conventional loading: Final crowns are cemente

Sponsors

Krishna Vishwa Vidhyapeet
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Two or more missing teeth , adequate bone height, width and optimal bone density, patients physical status,ASA Classes I & II

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Undermined systemic disorders and immunosuppersed patients and patients with uncontrollled hypertension and diabetis. patients smoking more than 5 cigarettes per day and who have history of alcoholism/drug abuse during last 5 years patients with history of chemotherapy or radiation for last 12 months poor oral hygiene and severe uncontrolled periodontitis

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Primary stability at implant placement, after 6 months and after 12 monthsTimepoint: Primary stability at implant placement, after 6 months and after 12 months

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
To determine & compare the primary implant stability quotient (ISQ) values of dental implants placed with Osseodensification & conventional protocol To determine & compare the secondary implant stability quotient (ISQ) values of implants loaded using the progressive loading & conventional loading protocol To radiographically determine the crestal bone loss in cases with progressive & conventional loading of implants. To compare the crestal bone loss of dental implants that undergo progressive & conventional loading protocols Timepoint: 0, 6 & 12 months

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Shubha Joshi

Krishna Vishwa Vidhyapeet Deemed to be University

drkamnoorshubha@gmail.com9900154295

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026