Results

Of the 924 dentists participating in the survey, 465 respondents (50%) offer implant treatment only and 85 respondents (9%) provide home-visit dental care only. Two hundred and six respondents (22%) provide both implant treatment and home-visit dental care (Fig. 2). The number of dentists who provide home-visit dental care was significantly lower among those who offer implant treatment (p < 0.01).

1. The situation of hospitalization/in-home convalescence as well as consultation about post-operative implant care sought by patients’ families and how dentists address this.

Table 2 presents the percentage of the dentists’ answers as to the extent of the presence of patients who received implant treatment on an outpatient basis but subsequently were admitted to the hospital or became homebound. Thirty percent of the dentists had implant patients who were admitted to the hospital or became homebound, and 27% of the dentists had no such patients, while 41% of the dentists had no knowledge about this.

Table 3 shows the proportion of dentists who had been consulted by implant patients or their families about oral health management when the patients were admitted to the hospital or became bedridden. Only 22% of the dentists had been consulted by the families of implant patients who were admitted to the hospital or became homebound. Seventy-six percent of the families of these patients had not sought counseling. The contents of the consultation were mainly about the “cleaning method/management method.”

Table 4 illustrates the percentage of answers to the question, “If you are informed by any of your implant patients that they cannot visit your clinic because they have become bedridden, how do you address this?”. Approximately 80% of the dentists answered that they would provide the post-operative care themselves or they would ask another dentist to provide the care instead of them. However, dentists who gave answers that would not lead to the provision of home-visit dental care accounted for 20%.

2. Proportion of individuals who have implants, the situation of oral self-care, and the dentists who provided implant treatment, among patients receiving home-visit dental care.

Table 5 shows the dentists’ answers to the question, “Have you actually seen provided implants for patients while providing home-visit dental care over the past 12 months?” Two hundred and ninety-one dentists had provided dental care at 4569 institutions and had seen a total of 12,356 patients, of whom 3% had implants. Of the implant patients, those who had their implants placed at the dentist’s dental clinic accounted for only approximately one-third (31%). Additionally, of all the patients, as many as 8795 patients were unable to perform oral self-care on their own. Among the patients with implants (360), the proportion of those who were unable to perform self-care was 56% (200), which was significantly lower (p < 0.01) compared to 77% for the patients who had no implants.

3. Methods to identify the presence of implants in patients receiving home-visit dental care.

Table 6 shows the methods used by the dentists who provide home-visit dental care to identify the presence of implants in patients. The most common method was “visual inspection.” On the other hand, use of radiography was 17%.

4. Usage status of the implant card retained by patients.

The implant card was evaluated as effective by the majority of dentists who provide home-visit dental care, regardless of whether or not they had seen patients with implants (Table 7). However, of the 671 dentists who offer implant treatment, those who were using the implant card (or pocket notebook) accounted for less than 50% and the dentists who were utilizing the standardized card (developed by the Japanese Society of Oral Implantology) or pocket notebook (developed by the Japanese Academy of Maxillofacial Implants) accounted for only 10% (Table 8).