Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Esthetic Evaluation of Implant-Supported Single Crowns: The Implant Restoration Esthetic Index and Patient Perception.

PURPOSE: To test the validity and reliability of a newly developed Implant Restoration Esthetic Index (IREI) and to compare esthetic outcomes reported by patients and professionals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten graduate students and 10 prosthodontists assessed esthetic outcomes of 27 single-tooth implants with the IREI. Six peri-implant soft tissue parameters were measured using visual analog scales: mesial papilla presence, distal papilla presence, gingival trigone, soft tissue curvature, alveolar process deficiency, and soft tissue color and texture, as well as the six crown parameters: crown contour, crown position, crown labial convexity, crown characterization, crown color and translucency, and abutment visibility. The validity was tested based on Pearson's correlation. The internal consistency reliability was analyzed by Cronbach's alpha. Interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to express the test-retest reliability and the inter-rater reliability. The correlations between patient and professional evaluations were analyzed by Pearson's correlation.

RESULTS: The IREI demonstrated significant correlation (p < 0.05) to the pink esthetic score and white esthetic score (PES/WES). The internal consistency reliability showed a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.830. The test-retest reliability was excellent in both the graduate student group and the prosthodontist group, with ICCs of 0.961 and 0.952, respectively (p < 0.05). The inter-rater reliability was acceptable, with ICCs of 0.649 and 0.667, respectively (p < 0.05). Low correlation coefficients were found between patient and professional evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicated that the IREI was considered a valid and reliable index involving sufficient parameters for professional esthetic evaluation of single-tooth implant restorations. The patient-reported esthetic outcomes had poor or no significant correlation to professional-reported outcomes.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app