• Cristina Bucchi, Massimo Del Fabbro, Alain Arias, Ramón Fuentes, José Manuel Mendes, Marie Ordonneau, Valérie Orti, and María-Cristina Manzanares-Céspedes.
• PhD Program in Medicine and Translational Research, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, cristina.bucchi@ufrontera.cl.
• Patient Prefer Adher. 2019 Jan 1; 13: 179-185.

PurposeBone graft materials can be obtained from the patient's own body (autologous graft), animals (xenograft), human cadavers (allograft) and synthetic materials (alloplastic bone graft). Patients may have ethical, religious or medical concerns about the origin of bone grafts, which could lead them to reject the use of certain types of bone graft in their treatments. The aim of this multicenter study, which surveyed patients from five university clinics in Portugal, France, Italy, Spain and Chile, was to analyze patients' opinions regarding the source of bone grafts.Patients And MethodsA survey composed of ten questions was translated into local languages and validated. Patients were asked about the degree of acceptance/rejection of each graft and the reasons for rejection. A chi-squared test was used to analyze statistically significant differences.ResultsThree hundred thirty patients were surveyed. The grafts that elicited the highest percentage of refusal were allograft (40.4%), autologous bone graft from an extraoral donor site (34%) and xenograft (32.7%). The grafts with the lowest rate of refusal were alloplastic (6.3%) and autologous bone grafts from an intraoral donor site (24.5%). The main reason for autologous bone rejection was the fear of pain and discomfort, for xenograft it was the fear of disease transmission and the rejection of use of animals for human benefit, and for allograft it was ethical/moral motivations and the fear of disease transmission. Religious affiliation influenced patient's preferences.ConclusionThe origin of bone grafts is still conflictive for a high percentage of patients.

3 keywords...

hide…