MSC - Page 60

ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY provisionalization can offer better conditions to improve soft tissue anatomy around implants with predictable aesthetic results (2-5). It is worth remembering that patientreported measures may be more sensitive than objective measures for detecting differences between prosthetic treatments (6-9). The discrepancy between the patient’s perceptions and the outcomes of functional tests suggests that study subjects’ and scientists’ concepts of function differ, or that subjective and objective data assess very different aspects of oral behavior. Acknowledgements The author acknowledges the support provided by the Department of Graduate Prosthodontics of the School of Dentistry – University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Program Director – Dr. Lyndon Cooper) for the completion of this treatment. The author’s gratitude is also extended to Dr. Marlene Teo (Department of Graduate Periodontics), who was responsible for the surgical phases, Dr. Hitomi Akimoto, who started the restorative phase, and Dr. Dina Dedi, who closely supervised the entire restorative phase. Conflict of interest statement There are no known conflicts of interest associated with th is publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcom. Bibliography 1. Stein RS, Kuwata M. A dentist and a dental technologist analyze current ceramo-metal procedures. Dent Clin North Am 1977;21(4):729-749. 2. Petrungaro PS. Creation and preservation of natural soft tissue emergence profiles around dental implants in the esthetic zone. J Cosmetic Dent 2009;24(4):66-80. 3. Rodriguez AM, Rosenstiel SF. Esthetic considerations related to bone and soft tissue maintenance and development around dental implants: report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the American Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 2012;108(4):259-267. 4. Wittneben JG, Buser D, Belser UC, Brägger U. Peri-implant soft tissue conditioning with provisional restorations in the esthetic zone: the dynamic compression technique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2013;33(4):447-455. 5. Dos Santos Nunes Reis JM, de Oliveira Abi-Rached F, Scardueli CR, Pinelli LA. Modified indexing technique for 136 the immediate interim restoration of a dental implant. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112(2):369-372. 6. de Grandmont P, Feine JS, Taché R, Boudrias P, Donohue WB, Tanguay R, Lund JP. Within subject comparisons of implant-supported mandibular prostheses: psychometric evaluation. J Dent Res 1994;73(5):1096-1104. 7. Feine JS, de Grandmont P, Boudrias P, Brien N, LaMarche C, Taché R, Lund JP. Within-subject comparisons of implantsupported mandibular prostheses: choice of prosthesis. J Dent Res 1994;73(5):1105-1111. 8. Feine JS, Maskawi K, de Grandmont P, Donohue WB, Tanguay R, Lund JP. Within-subject comparisons of implant-supported mandibular prostheses: evaluation of masticatory function. J Dent Res 1994;73(10):1646-1656. 9. Garrett NR, Kapur KK, Perez P. Effects of improvements of poorly fitting dentures and new dentures on patient satisfaction. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76(4):403-413. STOMA.EDUJ (2014) 1 (2)