Qualitative study explores dietary challenges in edentulous patients following implant surgery, indicating a need for professional guidance.
Purpose This study aimed to explore the dietary experiences and needs of edentulous patients after full arch implant surgery, and to provide evidence for developing scientific dietary management protocols. Materials and Methods A descriptive qualitative study guided by phenomenological principles was conducted by using purposive sampling. Semi‐structured in‐depth interviews were performed with participants who underwent full arch implant surgery in edentulous jaws. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis, involving familiarizing oneself with the data, generating initial codes, identifying, reviewing, defining, and naming themes, and producing the report. Results Twenty‐one participants, mean age (61.05 ± 7.05) years, were invited and included in the study. Three main themes and nine sub‐themes were identified: Functional food intake limitation (changes in food texture, masticatory dysfunction, limited dietary diversity, decreased food intake); Decline in quality of life (loss of eating enjoyment, excessive dietary restrictions, invisible impairment of social functioning); Need for dietary guidance (urgent demand for professional guidance, content of the requirements and formal preference). Conclusions Edentulous patients undergoing implant surgery experienced multidimensional eating restrictions and dietary challenges. The majority of patients expressed a pressing need for professional dietary guidance to enhance dietary experience and quality of life. During the critical period of osseointegration following edentulous jaw surgery, a combination of conventional and digital methods can be employed to meet patients' information needs and address existing clinical shortcomings. Based on research findings, future efforts are needed to develop a phased progressive dietary guidance protocol tailored to patient needs, aligned with the biological stages of osseointegration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Han et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: