Gurgel, Bruno César de VasconcelosDantas, José Lucas de Medeiros2023-12-062023-12-062023-11-03DANTAS, José Lucas de Medeiros. Utilização da ferramenta IDRA (Implant Disease Risk Assessment) para avaliação do risco dos pacientes às doenças peri-implantares. Orientador: Bruno César de Vasconcelos Gurgel. 2023. 25 f. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (Graduação em Odontologia) - Departamento de Odontologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2023.https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/55639The tool IDRA (Implant Disease Risk Assessment) was introduced to determine the risk and aid dentists in managing and controlling it. This study assessed the IDRA for determine the risk of peri-implant diseases. It was conducted a retrospective observational cross-sectional study, collecting data from 92 patients with 119 dental implants. The data included several IDRA parameters such as the patient's history of periodontitis, the presence of sites with bleeding on probing, teeth and/or implants with probing depths ≥ 5mm, alveolar bone loss relative to the patient's age, susceptibility to periodontitis, the frequency of supportive periodontal therapy, the distance from the restorative margin of the implant-supported prosthesis to the marginal bone crest, and factors related to the prosthesis itself. Additionally, the validated instrument PRA (Periodontal Risk Assessment) was employed for comparison. Statistical analysis utilized Chi-Square, Mann-Whitney, ROC Curve, and Kappa tests (p<0.05). The results indicated that 39 implants (32.8%) were categorized as medium risk, while 80 implants (67.2%) were classified as high risk. Among the IDRA parameters, the history of periodontitis was the primary factor contributing to an increased risk, being present in nearly 74% of the implants (p<0.001). IDRA displayed high sensitivity and low specificity (AUC=0.68; 95% CI: 0.59-0.76; p<0.001), and there was a low agreement between the IDRA and PRA tools (Kappa=0.141; p=0.003). Peri-implant disease developed in 22 implants, with 16 (72.7%) falling into the high-risk category and 6 (27.3%) into the medium/low-risk category, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. Therefore, this study did not demonstrate an association between the risk profile and the development of peri-implant disease. Nevertheless, the IDRA was shown to be a valuable tool for motivating, monitoring, and guiding patients regarding the risks associated with the development of peri-implant diseases.Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Brazilhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/br/Mucosite peri-implantarPeri-implantiteAvaliação de riscobachelorThesisCNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::ODONTOLOGIA