| Title |
Bruxism Will Decrease The Survival Rate Of A Posterior Implant |
| Clinical Question |
In an adult patient with posterior dental implants, will bruxism decrease the survival rate of the implant when examined 5 years later? |
| Clinical Bottom Line |
Adult patients with posterior implants that have parafunctional habits such as bruxism will have a decreased survival rate compared to individuals who do not have parafunctional habits. |
| Best Evidence |
|
| PubMed ID |
Author / Year |
Patient Group |
Study type
(level of evidence) |
| 23151302 | Manfredini/2012 | 21 papers total | Systematic Review | | Key results | According to this study, literature studying the effects of bruxism on dental implants is not abundant. However, from a biological perspective 6 of the 14 papers stated that there was no relationship between bruxism and dental implant failure, and no conclusions were drawn from the remaining 8 papers assessing biological complications. From the 7 papers reporting mechanical complications, 4 reported a positive relationship with bruxism. | | 22848892 | Hsu/2012 | 15 studies total | Systematic Review | | Key results | In this systematic review study, “occlusal overloading was positively associated with parafunctional habits such as bruxism.” Also, in biomechanical implant treatment complications, the primary etiologic factor is thought to be occlusal overloading. | |
| Evidence Search |
("bruxism"[MeSH Terms] OR "bruxism"[All Fields]) AND ("dental implants"[MeSH Terms] OR ("dental"[All Fields] AND "implants"[All Fields]) OR "dental implants"[All Fields]
occlusal[All Fields] AND parafunctional[All Fields] AND ("habits"[MeSH Terms] OR "habits"[All Fields]) AND ("dental implants"[MeSH Terms] OR ("dental"[All Fields] AND "implants"[All Fields]) OR "dental implants"[All Fields])
|
Comments on
The Evidence |
In the systematic review by Manfredini and colleagues a comprehensive and detailed search for relevant trials was performed and individual studies were assessed for validity. There were a total of 21 papers, 7 reporting mechanical complications and 14 assessing biological complications. The specific number of patients and trials is not mentioned in the paper. Lastly, there was no meta-analysis done.
In the systematic review by Hsu and colleagues a comprehensive and detailed search for relevant trials was performed and individual studies were assessed for validity. There were a total of 15 studies that they found relevant to their criteria. The number of total patients or in each trial was not mentioned. Lastly, there was no meta-analysis done.
|
| Applicability |
Madfredini and colleagues and Hsu and colleagues did not give any details about the patients selected in the studies they reviewed. Therefore, we cannot be certain that the patients in these trials were representative of our patients; however, there is no indication on the contrary, either. |
| Specialty |
(General Dentistry) (Oral Surgery) (Periodontics) |
| Keywords |
Dental implants, bruxism
|
| ID# |
2423 |
| Date of submission |
02/28/2013 |
| E-mail |
Riveraw3@livemail.uthscsa.edu |
| Author |
Walkiria Rivera |
| Co-author(s) |
|
| Co-author(s) e-mail |
|
| Faculty mentor |
Shannon Roberts, DDS |
| Faculty mentor e-mail |
Dobelbower@uthscsa.edu |
| |
|
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?) |
| None available | |
 |
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS', FACULTY, RESIDENTS and/or STUDENTS COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs) |
| None available | |