Patient-Reported Lifestyle Recovery and Clinical Implant Outcomes Following Immediate Versus Delayed Implant Placement
TL;DR
Immediate placement was associated with faster patient-reported lifestyle recovery, earlier functional rehabilitation, lower early postoperative pain, and greater treatment satisfaction, while long-term implant survival remained comparable between the two approaches.
Abstract
Background: The timing of dental implant placement may influence postoperative recovery, patient satisfaction, and clinical implant outcomes. However, conventional clinical parameters alone may not adequately reflect the patient's functional recovery and quality of life. This study compared patient-reported lifestyle recovery and clinical implant outcomes following immediate versus delayed implant placement. Methods: This prospective comparative study included 100 patients requiring single-tooth implant rehabilitation. Participants were equally allocated to immediate implant placement (Group I, n=50) and delayed implant placement (Group II, n=50). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14), visual analog scale for postoperative pain, lifestyle recovery scores, and treatment satisfaction. Clinical outcomes included implant survival, implant stability, probing depth, plaque and bleeding indices, peri-implant complications, and marginal bone loss. Outcomes were evaluated at baseline and during follow-up for 12 months. Results: Immediate implant placement was associated with significantly lower postoperative pain at 24 and 72 hours, earlier return to normal eating (4.2 ± 1.3 versus 5.6 ± 1.7 days; P<0.001), and earlier return to routine activities (3.1 ± 1.2 versus 4.4 ± 1.5 days; P<0.001). Lifestyle recovery and treatment satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the immediate-placement group. At 12 months, implant survival was 98.0% in the immediate group and 96.0% in the delayed group (P=0.557). Marginal bone loss was significantly lower following immediate placement (0.72 ± 0.31 versus 0.86 ± 0.35 mm; P=0.041), whereas probing depth, plaque index, bleeding index, and peri-implant complications were comparable between groups. Conclusion: Both immediate and delayed implant placement demonstrated favorable 12-month clinical outcomes. Immediate placement was associated with faster patient-reported lifestyle recovery, earlier functional rehabilitation, lower early postoperative pain, and greater treatment satisfaction, while long-term implant survival remained comparable between the two approaches. Incorporating patient-reported outcomes alongside clinical parameters may provide a more comprehensive assessment of implant treatment outcomes.