HOW TO IDENTIFY SUBGROUPS IN LONGITUDINAL CLINICAL DATA: TREATMENT RESPONSE PATTERNS IN PATIENTS WITH A SHORTENED DENTAL ARCH.

BACKGROUND: When dental patients seek care, treatments are not always successful,that is patients' oral health problems are not always eliminated or substantially reduced. Identifying these patients (treatment non-responders) is essential for clinical decision-making. Group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) is rarely used in dentistry, but a promising statistical technique to identify non-responders in particular and clinical distinct patient groups in general in longitudinal data sets. AIM: Using group-based trajectory modeling, this study aimed to demonstrate how to identify oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) treatment response patterns by the example of patients with a shortened dental arch (SDA). METHODS: This paper is a secondary data analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial. In this trial SDA patients received partial removable dental prostheses replacing missing teeth up to the first molars (N = 79) either or the dental arch ended with the second premolar that was present or replaced by a cantilever fixed dental prosthesis (N = 71). Up to ten follow-up examinations (1-2, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 96, 120, and 180 months post-treatment) continued for 15 years. The outcome OHRQoL was assessed with the 49-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP). Exploratory GBTM was performed to identify treatment response patterns. RESULTS: Two response patterns could be identified - "responders" and "non-responders." Responders' OHRQoL improved substantially and stayed primarily stable over the 15 years. Non-responders' OHRQoL did not improve considerably over time or worsened. While the SDA treatments were not related to the 2 response patterns, higher levels of functional, pain-related, psychological impairment in particular, and severely impaired OHRQoL in general predicted a non-responding OHRQoL pattern after treatment. Supplementary, a 3 pattern approach has been evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Clustering patients according to certain longitudinal characteristics after treatment is generally important, but specifically identifying treatment in non-responders is central. With the increasing availability of OHRQoL data in clinical research and regular patient care, GBTM has become a powerful tool to investigate which dental treatment works for which patients.

Rehabilitation of shortened dental arches: A fifteen-year randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Few long-term studies on treatments in the shortened dental arch (SDA) are available. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this trial was to analyse the long-term success of two different treatment concepts. METHODS: Patients over 35 years of age with missing molars in one jaw and at least the canine and one premolar present on both sides were eligible. In the partial removable dental prosthesis (PRDP) group (N = 81), molars and missing second premolars were replaced by a precision attachment retained prosthesis. In the SDA group (N = 71), the dental arch ended with the second premolar that had to be present or replaced by a cantilever fixed dental prosthesis. Follow-up examinations were carried out over 15 years. RESULTS: A comprehensive outcome variable comprised four failure categories for which Kaplan-Meier survival (success) analyses were conducted. Half of the patients exhibited a continuous preservation of the per protocol prosthetic status that remained totally unaffected by complications for more than 10 years. The event-free success rates for moderate or worse failure implied a loss of the per protocol prosthetic status. The respective survival rates fell below 50% at 14.2 years in the PRDP group and 14.3 years in the SDA group. In none of the analyses, a significant group difference was found. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with an SDA condition, changes in the prosthetic status have to be expected. The affected proportion increases almost linearly from shortly after treatment and comprises the majority after 15 years. The influence of the examined treatments on success appears to be low.

IMPACT OF SHORTENED DENTAL ARCH ON ORAL HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE.

BACKGROUND: A shortened dental arch (SDA) is an established treatment concept for patients with missing molars. However, little is known regarding long-term course of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in patients with SDA and the benefits from replacement of missing molars. OBJECTIVE: Purpose of this multi-center randomized clinical trial was to assess OHRQoL over a period of 15 years in patients with molar replacement by a removable partial denture (RPD) compared to patients with a restored SDA without molar replacement. METHODS: Patients at least 35 years of age with all molars missing in 1 jaw and at least the canine and one premolar present on each side were included. Patients received either a precision attachment-retained, RPD for replacement of missing molars (n = 79), or the dental arch ended with the second premolar (SDA) that had to be present or replaced by a cantilever fixed dental prosthesis (n = 71). Follow-up examinations continued for 15 years. OHRQoL was assessed with the 49-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP). OHIP summary and dimension scores were longitudinally modeled in the statistical analyses to assess course of OHRQoL over time applying an intention-to-treat approach. In addition, scores for the OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact were analyzed. RESULTS: After an initial improvement in OHRQoL indicated by a mean decrease of 20.0 OHIP points with an effect size of 0.61 in the entire study population, OHRQoL stayed relatively constant over the entire follow-up period. Assuming a constant time and treatment effects over the study period, OHRQoL did not differ statistically significant between the 2 treatments (0.4 OHIP points; 95%-CI: 7.1 - 6.2). OHRQoL after treatment did not change notably over 15 years and was statistically nonsignificant as well (P = .872). Similar findings were observed in all 4 OHRQoL dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: In patients, missing all molars in one jaw OHRQoL improved providing RPD or restoring SDA to a clinically relevant degree. Treatment-related improvement remained mostly stable over a period of at least 15 years. Therefore, patients can be informed that both treatment concepts are equivalent concerning long-term OHRQoL. Accordingly, patients' preferences regarding treatment options should be granted priority in treatment decision making with the SDA treatment option being the default.

The randomized shortened dental arch study: influence of two different treatments on interdental spacing over 5 years.

OBJECTIVES: Being a secondary outcome in a multicenter randomized controlled trial, the present analysis focused on interdental spacing in the shortened dental arch (SDA). The aim was to evaluate changes in interdental spacing in dependence of two different treatments after an observation period of up to 5 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients were either treated with a partial removable dental prosthesis (PRDP) for molar replacement (PRDP group) or according to the SDA concept aiming at a premolar occlusion (SDA group) in a randomized manner. Interdental spacing in the anterior region was measured with gauges and categorized as "0" (<0.1 mm), "1" (<0.5 mm), "2" (0.5-1 mm), and "3" (>1 mm). The statistical analysis was performed with analysis of variance models followed by linear contrast. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients (SDA n = 41, PRDP n = 50) were included. Changes of interdental spacing were detected in 70.7 % of all cases. A significant difference between the mean score changes was found in the mandible comparing the PRDP group and the SDA group. The respective mean score changes from baseline to 5 years were 0.23 (SD 0.49) for the PRDP group and 0.02 (SD 0.30) for the SDA group (p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: Major interdental spacing could be observed in neither of the groups. The SDA concept resulted in a slightly better outcome. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: When deciding whether to replace missing molars, the present results give further support to the SDA concept.

The randomized shortened dental arch study: temporomandibular disorder pain.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this multi-center, randomized controlled trial was to assess the impact of missing posterior support on the risk for temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain by comparing patients with either shortened dental arches (SDA) or molar replacement by removable dental prostheses (RDP). METHODS: A sample of 215 patients with bilateral molar loss in at least one jaw was consecutively recruited in 14 prosthodontic departments of dental schools in Germany. Of the initial sample, 152 patients (mean age: 59.7 years; 53.9 % female) received randomly allocated interventions (SDA: n = 71; RDP: n = 81). Presence of TMD pain was assessed using patients' self-reports and was verified by physical examination and by pain intensity, as the mean of current pain, worst pain, and average pain in the last 6 months, with 10-point ordinal rating scales. Assessments were performed before treatment and at follow-ups until 60 months after treatment. Impact of interventions on TMD risk and pain intensity was computed by applying logistic and linear random-intercept models. RESULTS: Tooth replacement (RDP) did not significantly change the risk for self-reported (odds ratio [OR]: 1.1; confidence interval [CI]: 0.4 to 3.4) or clinically verified (OR: 0.7; CI: 0.1 to 4.3) TMD pain compared to no tooth replacement (SDA). Mean characteristic pain intensity was virtually identical in both groups (Coeff: 0.01; CI: -0.30 to 0.32). CONCLUSION: Retaining or preservation of an SDA is not a major risk factor for TMD pain over the course of 5 years when compared to molar replacement with RPDs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Seemingly, missing molars do not have to be replaced in order to prevent TMD pain.

A Comparative Study of the Sensitivity and Specificity of the Ishihara Test With Various Displays.

OBJECTIVES: Visual colour differentiation in clinical research requires colour-competent (CC) participants. The Ishihara colour charts (ICC) have established themselves as the standard for CC screening of colour vision deficiencies (CVD). However, the extent to which the results can be compared with a presentation of the colour charts on a smartphone display (SD) is currently unknown. The aim of this in vitro study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the Ishihara colour deficiency test depending on the presentation mode. METHODS: Dental students (female n = 28; male n = 10; mean age, 23.5 ± 2.65 years; median age, 23.0 ± 13.0 years) evaluated 25 Ishihara test plates on their SD (n = 38) and/or a calibrated monitor (HP monitor, 22-inch; n = 18). The median size of the SD was 6.0 inches. Datasets with more than 2 failed charts were scored. RESULTS: When the Ishihara test charts were presented on a PC screen, the sensitivity was 94.4% and the specificity was 82.4% (0 mistakes: n = 14, <3 failures: n = 3, 14 false answers: n = 1). On the SD, a sensitivity of 96.0% and a specificity of 94.7% were calculated (89.5% were correct; 4 participants [10.5%] made <3 errors; and 1 participant made 21 errors). No significant difference between display modi (PC vs SD) was evaluated (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The presentation of ICC on an SD is useful and can be used for the investigation of a possible CVD of large groups. Comparable results to data projection can be achieved with a high degree of certainty. For CVD screening of larger groups (eg, students in preclinical training as part of CC training), the presentation of ICC on the SD can be used. This research was able to demonstrate that the sensitivity and specificity of the usual presentation method (Ishihara's booklet or data projection) is comparable.

Visual Versus Digital Color Determination of 3D-Printed Teeth as an Exercise in Dental Students' Education.

Visual color determination is part of the daily routine in dental practice. However, it is not a part of dental education so far. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether visual or digital tooth color determination of 3D-printed teeth is a reliable tool for inexperienced dentistry students. Preclinical dental students evaluated eleven 3D-printed, tooth-shaped samples (VarseoSmile Crown plus, BEGO, Bremen, Germany) of different color shades. Visual shade determination using a reference scale (3D-Master Toothguide (3DM_TG), VITA Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany), followed by a digital color determination using a spectrophotometer (VITA Easyshade V, (ES_V), VITA Zahnfabrik), was performed. Color deviation was calculated in the Lab* color space (ΔE00) and converted into CIELAB 2000. The results were evaluated using the Mann-Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test (α = 0.05). Significant differences between visual and digital color determination were proven (p < 0.001). Visual color determination (3DM_TG) showed a mean deviation (ΔE00 ± 95%CI) of 6.49 ± 0.47. Digital color determination (ES_V) showed significantly lower mean deviations of ΔE00 of 1.44 ± 0.58. Digital tooth color measurement using a spectrophotometer was a more reliable tool for the color determination of 3D-printed teeth for inexperienced dentistry students.

Visual Tooth Color Determination with Different Reference Scales as an Exercise in Dental Students' Education.

Visual color determination (VCD) requires color competence and individual training. The aim of this study was to evaluate the deviations in students' VCD with two different reference scales. The research hypothesis was that none of the color references would provide a better result. Participants evaluated nine templates randomly using two reference scales (VITA-classical (VC) and 3D-Master-Toothguide (3DM_TG)). The color distance to the chosen color (ΔEab) was calculated in the CIELAB 2000. The sum's changes in the parameters (LCh°) represented the target variable. Results were evaluated with non-parametric, rank-scaled methods, utilizing the median with a 25%-75% quartile. The significance level (α = 0.05) is determined using the Student's t-test. The mean ± 95%CI (SD) was -1.27 ± -1.09 (3.18); the median ΔE00 was -1.49 (-1.97; 0.96) for dC3DM_TG. The determination with VC showed noticeable differences (dCVC), with a mean ΔE00 of 0.00 ± 0.00 (2.20) and a median ΔE00 of 0.00 (1.17; 1.71). The standard error was 0.19 for the dCVC and 0.27 for the dC3DM_TG. dC3DM_TG vs. dCVC showed significant differences at p < 0.001. The dental student's VCD resulted in color deviations, regardless of the reference template used. The color deviations in hue and chroma were comparable, regardless of the reference scale. VCD's early implementation in dental education is useful to avoid shade misjudgments and potentially expensive remakes of dentures.

Retention of different temporary cements tested on zirconia crowns and titanium abutments in vitro.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to examine the retention force of monolithic zirconia copings cemented with various temporary cements on implant abutments in vitro. METHODS: Sixty exercise implants with pre-screwed implant abutments were embedded in resin. Subsequently, 60 CAD/CAM manufactured zirconia copings were divided into three main groups [Harvard Implant Semi-permanent (HAV), implantlink semi Forte (IMP), Temp Bond NE (TBNE)]. The zirconia copings were cemented on the implant abutments and loaded with 35 N. Specimens were stored in distilled water (37 °C) for 24 h. Half of the test specimens of each group were subjected to a thermocycling (TC) process. Retention force was measured in a universal testing machine. Using magnifying glasses, the fracture mode was determined. Statistical analysis was performed applying the Kruskal-Wallis test, the post hoc test according to Dunn-Bonferroni and a chi-square test of independence. RESULTS: Without TC, IMP showed the highest retention of the three temporary luting agents (100.5 ± 39.14 N). The measured retention forces of IMP were higher than those of HAV (45.78 ± 15.66 N) and TBNE (61.16 ± 20.19 N). After TC, retention was reduced. IMP showed the greatest retentive strength (21.69 ± 13.61 N, three fail outs). HAV and TBNE showed pull-off forces of similar magnitude (17.38 ± 12.77 N and 16.97 ± 12.36 N, two fail outs). The fracture mode analysis showed different results regarding the tested cements before and after TC (facture type before/after TC): IMP (III+II/III), HAV (I/II) and TBNE (III/III). There were clear differences of the fracture modes regarding the examination before and after TC. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, IMP showed the highest pull-off forces under the chosen test conditions. All three temporary luting agents showed lower retention forces after TC. Retention values in the individual cement classes were very heterogeneous. Easy cement removal in the crown lumen favours the dominance of adhesive cement fractures on the abutment and adhesive/cohesive cement fractures on the abutment with HAV appears advantageous in case of recementation of the superstructure.

Periodontal health in shortened dental arches: A 10-year RCT.

PURPOSE: This analysis focused on periodontal health in shortened dental arches (SDAs). METHODS: In a randomized controlled clinical trial, patients with missing molars in one jaw and at least one premolar and canine on both sides were eligible for participation. In the partial removable dental prosthesis (PRDP) group (n = 79), molars were replaced with a precision attachment retained PRDP. In the SDA group (n == 71), the SDA up to the second premolars was either left as is or restored with fixed dental prostheses. Outcome variables were vertical clinical attachment loss (CAL-V), pocket probing depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and plaque index (PLI). For CAL-V and PPD, the changes at six measuring points per tooth were analyzed. For BOP and PLI, patient related rates were calculated for each point in time. Statistical methods included linear regression analyses. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for CAL-V in the study jaw, the 10 year patient related mean changes were 0.66 mm in the PRDP group and -0.13 mm in the SDA group. The resulting mean patient related group difference of 0.79 mm (95% CI: 0.20 mm-1.38 mm) was significant (p = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the ITT analyses for PPD. For BOP and PLI, significant group differences with more favorable results for the SDA group were found. CONCLUSIONS: In view of lacking substantial differences for CAL-V and PPD, the overall differences were considered of minor clinical relevance. The results add confirmatory evidence to the shortened dental arch concept and its clinical viability (controlled-trials.com ISRCTN97265367).

The Randomized Shortened Dental Arch Study: Tooth Loss Over 10 Years.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of two different nonimplant treatments in the bilateral shortened dental arch (SDA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial, patients with complete molar loss in one arch were assigned to one of two different nonimplant treatments. In the partial removable dental prosthesis (PRDP) group, patients were provided with a distal-extension prosthesis retained with precision attachments. In the SDA group, patients were treated according to the SDA concept by preserving or restoring a premolar occlusion. RESULTS: Of the 152 treated patients, 82 reached the 10-year examination independent of their dental or prosthetic status. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the survival rates for tooth loss at 10 years were 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30 to 0.56) in the PRDP group and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.37 to 0.65) in the SDA group. For tooth loss in the study arch, the survival rates were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.52 to 0.78) in the PRDP group and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.45 to 0.73) in the SDA group. The number of teeth lost was higher than expected. In a multivariate analysis using a multiple Cox regression model, the covariates age (unit: 1 year, Hazard Ratio [HR]: 1.033, P = .03) and DMFT value (unit: 1 tooth, HR: 1.121, P = .03) were significant for time to first tooth loss in the study arch. CONCLUSION: The results suggest an overestimation of the influence of the prosthetic management of the bilateral SDA. In treatment decisions, patient preferences should be considered with appropriate weight.

Prospective evaluation of zirconia based tooth- and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: 3-year results.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective clinical study compared the performance of implant-retained (study group) and tooth-retained (control) zirconia based fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with at least 4 units. The null-hypothesis stated that complication rates in both groups are equally distributed. METHODS: The study included patients in need of one 4- to 6-unit implant- or tooth-retained FDP each. All patients were examined 2 weeks after insertion (baseline) and then at 6 month intervals up to 3 years. At follow-up all restorations were examined for framework fracture, chipping, marginal integrity, surface roughness and biological complications. Kaplan-Meier estimation was used for data analysis. RESULTS: 20 patients received tooth-retained and 7 patients implant-retained FDPs. The study was halted early when differences in chipping rates reached a statistically significant level. One FDP in the study group was lost due to implant abutment failure. FDP related chipping rates were 71% in the study group (mean observation time 32 months) and 15% in the control (mean observation time 34 months). Unit (abutment crown/pontic) related chipping rates were 32% in the study group and 6% in the control. Chipping rates differed statistically significant (log-rank test, p<.05). However, all ceramic defects could be corrected by grinding and polishing. No framework fracture was detected. CONCLUSIONS: Within the study limitations, survival rates seem satisfactorily in both implant- and tooth retained long-span zirconia based FDPs. However, implant-supported FDPs seem more susceptible to veneering ceramic chippings. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The high chipping rates found in this study discourage the use of long-span implant-retained FDPs with zirconia frameworks. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov with the ID Number NCT02220764.