Abstract
Purpose
To investigate the attitude of clinicians in Saudi Arabia towards dental implant treatment using different implant surgery approaches.
Materials and Methods
This cross-sectional observational study was conducted using a web-based questionnaire wherein 56 clinicians ranked their attitude toward computer-guided implant surgery (CGIS) and conventional non-computer-guided surgery (non-CGIS) in terms of advantages, disadvantages and clinical indications. Statistical analysis was conducted by the Spearman correlation test, Kruskal–Wallis test, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests, at a significance level of P<0.05.
Results
The survey results indicated that the most significant advantages of CGIS from the participants’ perspective were low levels of stress during surgery (P = 0.003) and minimal requirement of surgical skills (P = 0.04). Notably, the advantages of accurate outcome and predictable flapless surgery were not considered significantly higher for CGIS than for non-CGIS (P = 0.2 and 0.7, respectively). The high treatment cost was the most significant disadvantage of CGIS when compared to non-CGIS (P = 0.002), and complete edentulism was the most recommended clinical condition for CGIS.
Conclusion
Clinicians acknowledged the advantages of CGIS over non-CGIS, especially in complete edentulism. The significant advantages of CGIS were the clinician’s state of low stress and minimal skills required rather than the patient’s interest in treatment predictability. CGIS is an attractive approach for most participants, in spite of the low rate of actual use.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to express her thanks to all the participants in this study, to the biostatistician Dr.Meaad Moqaddam form King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Dentistry for her valid contribution in reviewing the current work and to Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing. No financial support was received for this investigation.
Disclosure
The author reports no conflicts of interest in this work.