Posterior Single Edentulous Sites
Conditions
Keywords
Single Posterior Implant Crowns, Cost Efficiency, Monolithic Zirconia Crowns, Full Digital Workflow, 3D Printed Prototype
Brief summary
Monolithic Zirconia Posterior Single Crown cost-efficiency study. Objective and subjective analysis will be performed through FIPS and PROMs scales to evaluate treatment quality outcomes.
Detailed description
Introduction Posterior implant single crowns have become the treatment of choice for single tooth replacement in the posterior sectors, due to its biological implications and minimally invasive approach since it requires no preparation of the adjacent tooth and enabling a more efficient hygiene for the patient than a bridge restoration. However, implant-based restorations require more time and economical resources from the patient and the dentist compared to traditional teeth-supported restorations. Currently the main interest is set upon broadening the potential patient spectrum for this kind of therapies, which can only be achieved by significally reducing the clinical treatment time and technical production time while maintaining an acceptable profit ratio and good quality treatment outcome. Objectives The main goal of this study is to determine whether monolithic screw retained posterior implant crowns (test) are more time-efficient than metal ceramic screw retained posterior implant. Moreover, as secondary objectives every screw retained crown will be submitted for Functional Implant Prosthodontic Score (FIPS) and Patient Related Outcome Measures (PROMs) evaluation. Hypothesis Monolithic screw-retained posterior single implant crowns performed through a full digital workflow are more time-efficient than conventional-digital workflow fabricated metal-porcelain screw-retained posterior single implant crowns. Monolitihic single posterior screw-retained implant crowns achieve better quality outcomes than metal porcelain single posterior screw-retained implant crowns. Material & Methods A total of 40 implants placed at Master de Integrada de Adultos will participate in a time- efficiency study that will compare monolithic screw-retained posterior implant crowns to metal ceramic screw-retained posterior implant crowns ( gold standard), moreover, every restoration will be submitted for Functional Implant Prosthetic Score (FIPS) and Patient Related Outcome Measures (PROMs)
Interventions
DEVICEMonolithic Zirconia Posterior Single Screw Retained Implant Crowns
Posterior single edentulous sites will be rehabilitated with monolithic zirconia single posterior implant crowns following two different full digital workflows
Sponsors
University of Barcelona
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator)
Masking description
The patient, the care provider and the principal investigator will be masked through the entire process
Intervention model description
Cost-efficiency study parallel study following CONSORT requisites
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Restorable implants * No signs or previous history of periimplantitis * Natural antagonist teeth * Natural adjacent teeth
Exclusion criteria
* Non restorable implants * Signs or previous history of periimplantitis * No natural antagonist teeth * No natural adjacent teeth
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | From the first visit to definitive crown placement | Analyze how many cost units (monetary unit) are needed to make monolithic zirconia single posterior implant supported crowns to assess economic profitability of theses crowns |
| Efficiency | From the first visit to definitive crown placement | Analyze how much time are needed to make monolithic zirconia single posterior implant supported crowns to assess economic profitability of theses crowns |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Functional Implant Prosthetic Score (FIPS) | 1 week post-op to 1 year follow up | Analyze treatment quality outcomes according to the Functional Implant Prosthetic Score. Score 0-10 |
| Patient Related Outcome Measures (PROMs) | 1 week post-op to 1 year follow up | Analyze how the patient perceives treatment outcomes according to the Patient Related Outcome Measures scale. Score 0-10 |
| Accuracy | Prosthetic Baseline to Definitive Crown Placement | Analyze castless full digital workflow accuracy, comparing the matching accuracy of the definitive crowns to the digital wax up for both groups. Both STL meshes will be analyzed with Shape Designer by 3 Shape to asses how does the physical prostheses match the virtual wax ups |
Countries
Spain
Outcome results
None listed