Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKarabuda, Cueneyt Z.
dc.contributor.authorArisan, Volkan
dc.contributor.authorOezdemir, Tayfun
dc.contributor.authorMumcu, Emre
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-04T10:36:53Z
dc.date.available2021-03-04T10:36:53Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citationArisan V., Karabuda C. Z. , Mumcu E., Oezdemir T., "Implant Positioning Errors in Freehand and Computer-Aided Placement Methods: A Single-Blind Clinical Comparative Study", INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, cilt.28, sa.1, ss.190-204, 2013
dc.identifier.issn0882-2786
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.otherav_6e16b688-561f-4e46-9632-1fabf36690a3
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/76018
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2691
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Simultaneous insertion of multiple implants may exhibit suboptimal positions, especially in edentulous jaws considered for a fixed restoration. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of and confounding factors in implant positioning errors related to the use of freehand and computer-aided treatment methods. Materials and Methods: A total of 353 implants were placed in 54 patients with at least one edentulous jaw using freehand and computer-aided methods involving 16 mucosa- and 12 bone-supported single- and multiple-type stereolithographic surgical guides. At the stage of prosthesis delivery, a blinded examiner evaluated seven positioning error criteria. Results were analyzed by chi-square test and logistic regression. Results: Interproximal emergence (OR = 2.82, P < .0001), insufficient interimplant distance (OR = 1.42, P < .0001), and improper parallelism (OR = 1.24, P = .001) errors were significantly higher in implants placed by the freehand method. The highest probability of positioning error (88%) was associated with the use of the freehand method, whereas the lowest (6%) was associated with single- type, mucosa- supported guides with other significant confounding factors. Conclusion: Utilizing computer-aided methods may alleviate the occurrence of implant positioning errors that are frequently associated with the freehand method. The use of software planning with enhanced viewing capabilities and single- type, mucosa-supported stereolithographic surgical guides in suitable patients minimizes errors.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectDiş Hekimliği
dc.subjectDİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ, ORAL CERRAHİ VE TIP
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.subjectTıp
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.titleImplant Positioning Errors in Freehand and Computer-Aided Placement Methods: A Single-Blind Clinical Comparative Study
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS
dc.contributor.departmentEskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi , ,
dc.identifier.volume28
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.startpage190
dc.identifier.endpage204
dc.contributor.firstauthorID72731


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record