Table 4. | Assessment criteria that professionals use when planning IDIP |
| Parameter | Specialists (n [%]) | χ2 | df | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Periodontists (n = 65) |
Oral surgeons (n = 121) |
||||
| Evaluation of the aesthetic zone | |||||
| The amount of apical bone beyond the extraction socket | 31 (47.7%) | 49 (40.5%) | 0.893 | 1 | 0.345 |
| The quantitative and qualitative indicators of the soft tissues | 63 (96.9%) | 99 (81.8%) | 8.585 | 1 | 0.003a |
| The morphology of the bone walls of the extraction socket | 58 (89.2%) | 106 (87.6%) | 0.107 | 1 | 0.743 |
| Evaluation of non-aesthetic zone | |||||
| A wide septum of extraction socket | 56 (86.2%) | 94 (77.7%) | 1.943 | 1 | 0.163 |
| The amount of apical bone beyond the extraction socket | 55 (84.6%) | 92 (76%) | 1.879 | 1 | 0.17 |
| The quantitative and qualitative indicators of the soft tissues | 39 (60%) | 51 (42.1%) | 5.396 | 1 | 0.02a |
| The morphology of the bone walls of the extraction socket | 55 (84.6%) | 102 (84.3%) | 0.003 | 1 | 0.995 |
| IDIP into infected extraction socket with chronic periapical infections | |||||
| Yes | 38 (58.5%) | 101 (83.5%) | 14.006 | 1 | 0.000a |
| No | 27 (41.5%) | 20 (16.5%) | 14.006 | 1 | 0.000a |
| IDIP into infected extraction socket when suppuration is observed from the periodontal pocket of one tooth | |||||
| Yes | 6 (9.2%) | 31 (25.6%) | 7.127 | 1 | 0.002a |
| No | 59 (90.8%) | 90 (74.4%) | 7.127 | 1 | 0.007a |
aStatistically significant at P < 0.05 (chi-square [χ2] test).
|
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)