↓ Skip to main content

Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Implant Dentistry, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#12 of 110)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study
Published in
International Journal of Implant Dentistry, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40729-017-0078-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

David E. Simmons, Pooja Maney, Austin G. Teitelbaum, Susan Billiot, Lomesh J. Popat, A. Archontia Palaiologou

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare a parallel wall design implant to a tapered apex design implant when placed in the posterior maxilla using two different surgical protocols. Twenty-seven patients (30 implants) were divided into three groups. All implants were 4 mm wide in diameter and 8 mm long. Group A received 10 tapered implants (OSPTX) (Astra Tech OsseoSpeed TX™) using the soft bone surgical protocol (TXSoft). Group B received 10 tapered implants (OSPTX) (AstraTech OsseoSpeedTX™) using the standard surgical protocol (TXStd). Group C received 10 parallel wall implants (OSP) (AstraTech OsseoSpeed™) using the standard surgical protocol (OStd). All implants were placed in the posterior maxilla in areas with a minimum of 8-mm crestal bone height. Resonance frequency measurements (implant stability quotient (ISQ)) and torque values were recorded to determine initial implant stability. All implants were uncovered 6 weeks after placement and restored with a functionally loaded resin provisional screw-retained crown. Resonance frequency measurements were recorded at the time of implant placement, at 6 weeks and 6 and 12 months. Twelve months after implant placement, the stability of the implants was recorded and the final restorations were placed using custom CAD/CAM fabricated abutments and cement-retained PFM DSIGN porcelain crowns. After implant restoration, bone levels were measured at 6 and 12 months with standardized radiographs. Radiographic mean bone loss was less than 0.5 mm in all groups, with no statistically significant differences between the groups. Implant survival rate at 1 year was 93.3%, with 2/30 implants failing to integrate prior to functional loading at 6 weeks. No statistically significant difference was found between ISQ measurements between the three groups at all time intervals measured. Strong positive correlations were found between overall bone loss at 6 months and insertion torque at time of placement. A very weak correlation was found between insertion torque and ISQ values at time of implant placement. Survival and stability of OSPTX and OSP implants is comparable. Osteotomy preparation by either standard or soft bone surgical protocol presented no significant effect on implant survival and stability for the specific implant designs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 26%
Student > Postgraduate 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 14 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 55%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Materials Science 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Unknown 16 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,068,921
of 24,892,887 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Implant Dentistry
#12
of 110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,188
of 316,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Implant Dentistry
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,892,887 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 110 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.