Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 22, 2026
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Systematic review of outcome measurements and reference group(s) to evaluate and compare implant success and failure
Ian Needleman1, Sarah Chin, Tim O'Brien
1Unit of Periodontology and International Centre for Evidence-Based Oral Health, UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, UK. i.needleman@ucl.ac.uk
Background:
There is a lack of consensus on measures to assess implant performance in clinical research.
Objectives:
To investigate the outcomes measures and reference groups employed to evaluate and compare implant success and failure.
Data Sources:
MEDLINE (OVID) and Web of Science with searching reference lists of included papers.
Study Eligibility Criteria:
Inclusion: root form, titanium implants in dentate or edentulous individuals. Longitudinal studies reporting survival or success outcomes on at least 20 participants ≥ mean 5 years.
Study Appraisal And Synthesis Methods:
Descriptive statistics.
Results:
Two-hundred and sixteen studies were included. Implant survival was the most commonly reported primary outcome (60%) with success at 15.7%. Success constituted a wide variety of measures with little consistency. A percentage of 98.6% of studies employed the implant as the unit of analysis with little consideration of clustering within patients. The status of periodontal and general heath of study groups was unclear for more than 80% studies. The proportion of studies comprising randomized trials or using appropriate analytical methods increased from 1980 to 2011.
Limitations:
Considers only English language and there was no author contact.
Conclusion:
In view of the disparate outcome measures employed to assess dental implant performance, agreement is needed both on a core set of implant outcomes and their statistical management.
Related Concept Videos
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care evaluation by...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...