www.sbdmj.com - Stomatologija - Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal

Stomatologija 2018; 20 (1): 10-3 122 KB

Implant-supported prosthesis treatment planning aspects of Kaunas city dentists and dental specialists

Henrikas Rusilas*, Laura Jacinkevičiūtė*, Jan Pavel Rokicki*

Summary

Objective. Rehabilitation of mastication using fixed or removable prosthesis on dental implants is a daily procedure in modern dentistry.The huge variety of diagnostic tools and methods, such as cone beam computed tomography or surgical guides help to avoid complications. A vast quantity of diagnostic tools and prosthesis require a tight communication between surgeons and prosthodontists in order to achieve better treatment plan.

Methods. The questionnaire was approved by LUHS Committee of Ethics. A questionnaire of 17 demographic and specialized questions was composed. A randomized survey of dentists and dental specialists was conducted in Kaunas. A statistical analysis was performed using χ² test and Student’s T-test criteria.

Results. Most of correspondents believe that treatment plan should be created by the current dentist, regardless his/hers specialization. All correspondents performing dental implantation, use elevation of mucoperiosteal flap. The most common diagnostic tool among dentists and oral surgeons is panoramic x-ray. The most common diagnostic tools between prosthodontists are panoramic x-ray and analysis of dental stone castings. The most common complications among dentists and prosthodontists are improper adjustment of soft tissue and errors of dental technicians, among oral surgeons – improper adjustment of soft tissues and implant position.

Conclusions. 1. The creation of treatment plan does not depend on specialization of dentist. 2. The elevation of mucoperiosteal flap is more common than non-flap procedure. 3. The most used diagnostic method is panoramic x-ray. 4. The most prevalent complications are improper adjustment of soft tissues and errors of dental technicians.

Key words: implant, prosthesis, treatment, plan.

Received: 16 01 2018

Accepted for publishing: 27 03 2018

*Faculty of Odontology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas Lithuania

Address correspondence to Henrikas Rusilas, Faculty of Odontology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, V. Kudirkos 19, 50276 Kaunas, Lithuania.

E-mail address: henrikas.h@gmail.com



	Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal

March, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 1 CONTENTS REVIEWS Quality of life in patients with temporomandibular disorders. A systematic review Dovile Bitiniene, Roberta Zamaliauskiene, Ricardas Kubilius, Marijus Leketas, Tadas Gailius, Karina Smirnovaite 3-9 SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES Implant-supported prosthesis treatment planning aspects of Kaunas city dentists and dental specialists Henrikas Rusilas, Laura Jacinkevičiūtė, Jan Pavel Rokicki 10-13 REVIEWS Uses of maxillary sinus lateral wall bony window in an open window sinus lift procedure: literature review Elvinas Juzikis, Algimantas Gaubys, Henrikas Rusilas 14 -21 Treatment options for odontogenic maxillary sinusitis: a review Rokas Aukštakalnis, Rūta Simonavičiūtė, Regimantas Simuntis 22-26 SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES The oral health status and behaviour of methadone users in Lithuania Rokas Aukštakalnis, Tomas Jurgelevičius 27-31 CASE REPORT Self-inflicted face gunshot injuries: two case reports Rokas Gelažius, David Kasradze, Albinas Gervickas 32-36 © 2018 Stomatologija		Stomatologija 2018; 20 (1): 10-3 122 KB Implant-supported prosthesis treatment planning aspects of Kaunas city dentists and dental specialists Henrikas Rusilas, Laura Jacinkevičiūtė, Jan Pavel Rokicki* Summary Objective. Rehabilitation of mastication using fixed or removable prosthesis on dental implants is a daily procedure in modern dentistry.The huge variety of diagnostic tools and methods, such as cone beam computed tomography or surgical guides help to avoid complications. A vast quantity of diagnostic tools and prosthesis require a tight communication between surgeons and prosthodontists in order to achieve better treatment plan. Methods. The questionnaire was approved by LUHS Committee of Ethics. A questionnaire of 17 demographic and specialized questions was composed. A randomized survey of dentists and dental specialists was conducted in Kaunas. A statistical analysis was performed using χ² test and Student’s T-test criteria. Results. Most of correspondents believe that treatment plan should be created by the current dentist, regardless his/hers specialization. All correspondents performing dental implantation, use elevation of mucoperiosteal flap. The most common diagnostic tool among dentists and oral surgeons is panoramic x-ray. The most common diagnostic tools between prosthodontists are panoramic x-ray and analysis of dental stone castings. The most common complications among dentists and prosthodontists are improper adjustment of soft tissue and errors of dental technicians, among oral surgeons – improper adjustment of soft tissues and implant position. Conclusions. 1. The creation of treatment plan does not depend on specialization of dentist. 2. The elevation of mucoperiosteal flap is more common than non-flap procedure. 3. The most used diagnostic method is panoramic x-ray. 4. The most prevalent complications are improper adjustment of soft tissues and errors of dental technicians. Key words: implant, prosthesis, treatment, plan. Received: 16 01 2018 Accepted for publishing: 27 03 2018 *Faculty of Odontology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas Lithuania Address correspondence to Henrikas Rusilas, Faculty of Odontology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, V. Kudirkos 19, 50276 Kaunas, Lithuania. E-mail address: henrikas.h@gmail.com