RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The understanding and adherence to postoperative care instructions may be influenced by how they are presented by the professional interfering the recuperation process after surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a postoperative phone call follow-up compared with a traditional verbally and written instructions regarding compliance of postoperative recommendations after third molar surgery; and secondly, to discover the main points of non-compliance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized clinical study was performed including patients that underwent surgical extraction of an impacted mandibular or maxillary third molar in the Oral Surgery Unit of the University of Valencia from January 2016 to January 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three different test groups according to how the post-operative instructions were delivered: brief written instructions, written extended instructions or brief written instructions plus a phone call follow-up at 3-day postoperative period. Patients were interviewed about their adherence to the instructions one week after surgery. The significance level was set at p<0.05. RESULTS: The higher score of compliance was found to the phone call follow-up group (p=0.001). No statistically significant differences were found between brief written group and the group that received written extended instructions. In the phone call follow-up group all variables assessed to the compliance were fulfilled. To brief written and written extended instructions groups, the main points of non-compliance were hygiene and smoking (p<0.001, p=0.026, respectively), and tended towards significance for chlorhexidine rinses and antibiotic, analgesic and anti-inflammatories medication prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone call follow-up can promote patient adherence to postoperative recommendations after third molar surgery. The main factors of non-compliance were not maintain a proper hygiene and not smoking, followed by not performing chlorhexidine rinses and not following medication prescribed. Key words:Compliance, postoperative instructions, postoperative recommendations, third molar surgery.
RESUMO
Background: Dental implant placement using flapless surgery is a minimally invasive technique that improves blood supply compared with flapped surgery. However, the flapless technique does not provide access to allow bone regeneration. Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical parameters following implant surgery in healed sites, using two procedures: flapped vs. flapless surgery. Material and Methods: A detailed electronic search was carried out in the PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. The focused question was, "How do flapped and flapless surgical techniques affect the clinical parameters of dental implants placed in healed sites?". All the studies included with a prospective controlled design were considered separately, depending on whether they had been conducted on animals or humans. The following data were recorded in all the included studies: number of implants, failures, location (maxilla, mandible), type of rehabilitation (partial or single), follow-up and flap design. The variables selected for comparison in the animal studies were the following: flap design, gingival index, mucosal height, recession and probing pocket depth. In humans studies the variables were as follows: flap design, plaque index, gingival index, recession, probing pocket depth, papilla index and keratinized gingiva. Results: Ten studies were included, six were experimental studies and four were clinical studies. Studies in animals showed better results using the flapless technique in the parameters analyzed. There is no consensus in the clinical parameters analyzed in human studies, but there is a trend to better results using flapless approach. Conclusions: The animal studies included in the present review show that implants placed in healed sites with a flapless approach have better clinical parameters than the flapped procedure in a short-term follow-up. In human studies, there is no consensus about which technique offer better results in terms of clinical parameters. Therefore, more research in humans is required in order to overcome the limitations and contrast these results (AU)
No disponible
