Professional and patient‐reported outcomes of two surgical approaches for implant‐supported single‐crown restoration: 1‐year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial

Abstract Objectives To test whether there is a difference in professional and patient‐reported outcome measures (PROM) after single‐crown restoration supported by short implants (SI) (6 mm) compared with standard length implants (SLI) (13 mm) in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) after 1 year of functional implant loading. Material and Methods Forty patients were randomly allocated to SI or SLI/MSFA. PROM included Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP‐14) questionnaire and subjective assessment of the peri‐implant soft tissue (A), implant crown (B), implant function (C) and overall implant treatment outcome (D) using visual analogue scale (VAS). Professional assessment included pink aesthetic score (PES) and white aesthetic score (WES). Results No significant differences in professional or PROM between the two treatment modalities were revealed at any time point ( p > .05). OHIP‐14 score decreased at baseline and 1 year after functional implant loading compared with preoperative measurements indicating improved quality of life with both treatment modalities. The 1‐year mean VAS score was 9.4 (A), 9.3 (B), 9.6 (C) and 9.3 (D) for SI compared with 9.3 (A), 9.6 (B), 9.7 (C) and 9.2 (D) for SLI. The 1‐year mean PES/WES scores were 11.3 and 8.1 for SI compared with 11.2 and 8.1 for SLI/MSFA. Conclusions Prosthetic rehabilitation of the posterior part of the maxilla with SI or SLI/MSFA revealed no significant differences in professional and PROM after 1 year of implant loading.