İmplant Üstü Protetik Restorasyonların Temizliğinde Tercih Edilen Yöntemlerde Hastaların Farkındalık ve Bilgi Düzeylerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 47 - 53, 30.08.2024

Tuba Şenocak , Zeynep Çintosun , Funda Bayindir

https://doi.org/10.62268/add.1514694

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Protetik Diş Tedavisi Kliniği’ne başvuran hastaların profesyonel implant bakımı sağlama konusundaki tercihleri ve implanta özgü ağız hijyeni yöntemlerinin farkındalığına ait tutum ve bilgilerini değerlendirmek amacıyla yapılmıştır.
Yöntem: Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Protetik Diş Tedavisi Kliniği’ne başvuran implant üstü sabit ya da hareketli protetik restorasyon kullanmakta olan rastgele seçilmiş 130 hasta üzerine anket uygulaması gerçekleştirilmiştir.
Sonuç: Hastaların implant üstü protetik restorasyonların temizliğinde tercih ettikleri yöntemler arasında diş ipi kullanımı (%27.7), ara yüz fırçası kullanımı (%21.5), ağız duşu kullanımı (%7.7) ve ağız gargarası kullanımı (%80.8) sorularına evet cevabı verdikleri tespit edilmiştir. Ağız duşu kullanım oranları eğitim ve ağız duşu kullanımı arasındaki ilişki açısından incelendiğinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmuştur ( p< 0.001).
Tartışma: Diş hekimleri hastalarının implant üstü protezlerin temizliği ve evde bakım önerilerini anlatma ve bilinçlendirme konusunda majör rol oynamaktadır. Hastaların bu noktada genel farkındalık eğilimleri az düzeydedir. Bu çalışma ile hastaların protez temizliği ve bakımı konusunda bilgilendirilmesi gerektiği gösterilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dental implant, implant bakım farkındalığı, oral hijyen, anket çalışması

Teşekkür

We hope you find our manuscript suitable for publication and look forward to hearing from you.

Assessing Patients' Awareness and Knowledge of Suggested Cleaning Procedures for Implant Prosthetic Restorations

Öz

Objectives:
This study was conducted to evaluate the attitudes and knowledge of patients attending Ataturk University Faculty of Dentistry Prosthodontics Clinic regarding their preferences for providing professional implant care and awareness of implant-specific oral hygiene methods.
Material and Methods:
A questionnaire was administered to 130 randomly selected patients with fixed or removable prosthetic restorations on implants attending the Prosthodontics Clinic of Ataturk University Faculty of Dentistry.
Results: It was found that patients answered yes to the questions of flossing (27.7%), use of interface brush (21.5%), use of mouth shower (7.7%), and use of mouthwash (80.8%) among the preferred methods for cleaning implant prosthetic restorations. When the rates of mouth shower use were analyzed in terms of the relationship between education and the use of mouth shower, a statistically significant relationship was found (P < 0.001).
Conclusion:
Dentists play a major role in explaining and raising awareness of their patients about the cleaning of implant prostheses and home care recommendations. The general awareness tendency of patients at this point is low. This study proved that patients need to know how to take care of and clean their dentures. Our study's hypothesis, which was founded on our clinical findings prior to the investigation, suggested that there might be variations in how implant-retained prosthetic restorations are cleaned depending on the age and educational level of the patient.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dental implants, Implant maintenance, Oral hygiene, Survey

Kaynakça

• 1. Günday M, Şener ID, Yamaner G. The study of the age of becoming edentulous in the last 20 years in Turkey. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2009;49:172-5.
• 2. Thomsonn WM, Ma S. An ageing population poses dental challenges. Singapore Dent J. 2014;35:3-8.
• 3. Moraschini V, Poubel LADC, Ferreira VF, Barboza EDSP. Evaluation of survival and success rates of dental implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 10 years: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44:377-88.
• 4. Gulati M, Govila V, Anand V, Anand B. Implant maintenance: a clinical update. Int Sch Res Notices. 2014;9:908534.
• 5. Bidra AS, Daubert DM, Garcia LT, Gauthier MF, Kosinski TF, Nenn CA, Olsen JA, Platt JA, Wingrove SS, Chandler ND, Curtis DA. A systematic review of recall regimen and maintenance regimen of patients with dental restorations. Part 2: implant-borne restorations. J Prosthodont. 2016;25:16-31.
• 6. Schmage P, Kahili F, Nergiz I, Scorziello TM, Platzer U, Pfeiffer P. Cleaning effectiveness of implant prophylaxis instruments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29:331-7.
• 7. Monique C, Matthew S, Ivan B. Dental implant hygiene and maintenance protocols: a survey of oral health practitioners in Australia. Am Dent Hyg. 2021;95:25-35.
• 8. Derks J, Tomasi C. Peri-implant health and disease. A systematic review of current epidemiology. J Clin Periodontol. 2015;42:158-71.
• 9. Özişçi Ö. Assessing the quality of YouTubeTM videos on fixed dental implant home-care and maintenance protocols. Int J Dent Hyg. 2024;22:444-51.
• 10. Son JY, Kim EJ. Interdental cleaning and periodontal status among older Koreans: findings from KNHANES VII. Gerodontology. 2024;41:295-304.
• 11. Pellizzer E, Almeida D, Rosse M. Prevalence of removable partial dentures users treated at the Aracatuba Dental School – UNESP. Gerodontology. 2012;2:140-4.
• 12. Brennan DS, Spencer AJ, Roberts-Thomson KF. Tooth loss, chewing ability and quality of life. Qual Life Res. 2008;17:227-35.
• 13. Katafuchi M, Weinstein BF, Leroux BG, Chen YW, Daubert DM. Restoration contour is a risk indicator for peri-implantitis: a cross-sectional radiographic analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45:225-32.
• 14. Serino G, Ström C. Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous patients: association with inadequate plaque control. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20:169-74.
• 15. Mahtani AA, Lakshmanan R. Awareness of interdental aids and thier regular use in daily oral hygeine-a questionnaire based study. J Pharm Sci Res. 2017;9:202-4.
• 16. Gjermo P, Flötra L. The effect of different methods of interdental cleaning. J Periodontal Res. 1970;5:230-6.
• 17. Kiger RD, Nylund K, Feller RP. A comparison of proximal plaque removal using floss and interdental brushes. J Clin Periodontol. 1991;18:681-4.
• 18. Cheung MC, Hopcraft MS, Darby IB. Dentists’ preferences in implant maintenance and hygiene instruction. Aust Dent J. 2021;66:278-88.
• 19. Louropoulou A, Slot DE, Weijden F Van Der. Mechanical self-performed oral hygiene of implant supported restorations: a systematic review. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2014:60-9.
• 20. Mortilla L. Hygiene and soft tissue management: the hygienist’s perspective: dental implants. Art Sci. 2001;9:423-44.
• 21. Maeda T, Mukaibo T, Masaki C, Thongpoung S, Tsuka S, Tamura A, Aonuma FA, Kondo Y, Hosokawa R. Efficacy of electric-powered cleaning instruments in edentulous patients with implant-supported full-arch fixed prostheses: a crossover design. Int J Implant Dent. 2019;5:1-8.
• 22. Goldstein RE, Nimmons KJ. The expanding esthetic practice: implant maintenance. Vol 2.; 2005.
• 23. Pons R, Nart J, Valles C, Salvi GE, Monje A. Self-administered proximal implant-supported hygiene measures and the association to peri-implant conditions. J Periodontol. 2021;92:389-9.
• 24. Abrahamsson KH, Wennström JL, Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I. Altered expectations on dental implant therapy; views of patients referred for treatment of peri-implantitis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28:437-42. 25. Evren BA, Uludamar A, Işeri U, Ozkan YK. The association between socioeconomic status, oral hygiene practice, denture stomatitis and oral status in elderly people living different residential homes. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2011;53:252-57.
• 26. Sreedevi M, Ramesh A, Dwarakanath C. Periodontal status in smokers and nonsmokers: a clinical, microbiological, and histopathological study. Int J Dent. 2012;1:571590.
• 27. Zimmermann H, Hagenfeld D, Diercke K, El-Sayed N, Fricke J, Greiser KH, Kühnisch J, Linseisen J, Meisinger C, Pischon N, Pischon T, Samietz S, Schmitter M, Steinbrecher A, Kim T, Becher H. Pocket depth and bleeding on probing and their associations with dental, lifestyle, socioeconomic and blood variables: a cross-sectional, multicenter feasibility study of the German National Cohort. BMC Oral Health. 2015;15:1-9.
• 28. Ercalik-Yalcinkaya S, Özcan M. Association between oral mucosal lesions and hygiene habits in a population of removable prosthesis wearers. J Prosthodonts. 2015;24:271-8.