Single Mandibular Implant Study: Recruitment Considerations

• Published in: The International journal of prosthodontics Vol. 30; no. 1; p. 43
• Main Authors: Passia, Nicole, Abou-Ayash, Samir, Bender, Daniela, Fritzer, Elfriede, Graf, Michael, Kappel, Stefanie, Konstantinidis, Ioannis, Mundt, Torsten, Maltzahn, Nadine Frfr, Wolfart, Stefan, Kern, Matthias
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.01.2017
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Checklist; Female; Germany; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Jaw, Edentulous - rehabilitation; Male; Mandible; Middle Aged; Patient Selection; Radiography, Panoramic
• ISSN: 0893-2174
• DOI: 10.11607/ijp.4975

The aim of this multicenter single mandibular implant study was to compare the clinical outcome of an immediately loaded implant placed in the midline of an edentulous mandible with the clinical outcome when closed healing and delayed loading is chosen. Here, the patient recruitment period and the main reasons for exclusion were analyzed. Patient recruitment was performed at nine German universities. Rather conservative inclusion and exclusion criteria, including denture satisfaction, denture status, a psychologic symptom checklist, and a defined bone height in the posterior mandible, had to be fulfilled. It was initially calculated that 230 persons would have to be screened within 13 months to include 180 persons in the trial. Within 13 months (December 2012 to December 2013), 201 patients were screened for possible inclusion in the trial and 148 met the inclusion criteria. Finally, after the recruitment period was extended by 2.5 months, 224 patients were screened and 169 were included. Of those screened, 55 (24.6%) did not meet the inclusion criteria and were excluded. Another 4 patients (1.8%) were excluded based on their psychologic symptom checklist score, while 5 others (2.8%) showed signs of noncompliance. A further 8 patients (4.4%) decided not to participate and withdrew their informed consent, and another 3 (1.3%) were no longer available after screening. Another 2 patients were excluded due to medical contraindications and 1 due to an insufficient mandibular denture. In 34 cases (15.2%), the residual bone height did not comply with McGarry type II or III. Within the limitations of this patient recruitment period, it can be concluded that residual bone height is the most important factor when considering elderly edentulous patients for implant therapy. The psychologic symptom checklist score was less important.