Literature DB >> 22369711

Dental implants and improvement of oral health-related quality of life.

Kriz Pavel1, Michaela Seydlova, Tatjana Dostalova, Valenta Zdenek, Karel Chleborad, Zvarova Jana, Jitka Feberova, Hippmann Radek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) is a multifaceted field involving many factors. The aim of our study was to assess whether implant therapy improves OHRQoL in dental patients.
METHODS: Patients receiving at least one implant completed a health-related questionnaire before and after the implantation (minimum 1.5 months). Questions covered the functional and aesthetic scales (AS). Paired differences in individual scores were analysed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. A univariate analysis of covariance was used to relate overall and scale-specific average paired differences to age, gender, marital and educational status. Multivariate analysis of covariance was used to assess interactions between the covariates and different scales of outcome. All tests were performed at statistical significance level α = 0.05.
RESULTS: All twelve Wilcoxon tests supported an improvement in OHRQoL after implant placement. On the AS, the mean difference in OHRQoL scores was found to be associated with marital status, presence of aesthetic reasons for undergoing the surgery and number of front teeth replaced by implants. On the functional scale (FS), most significant associations were observed with the number of front teeth replaced via implantation, followed by the presence of chewing problems and marital status. The multivariate analysis helped to identify the covariates that varied significantly over the two scales of interest.
CONCLUSIONS: Effects of covariates responding significantly differently on different scales should not be summarized using an overall univariate analysis, using paired score differences averaged over all items. Such effect summary would be misleading. In the present study, significant implant-related improvements in OHRQoL were observed on both the aesthetic and FS in patients with at least one implant in the front dental area.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22369711     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2011.00668.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Community Dent Oral Epidemiol        ISSN: 0301-5661            Impact factor:   3.383


  4 in total

1.  A case of cleidocranial dysostosis: dilemma for a prosthodontist.

Authors:  Shuchi Tripathi; Raghuwar D Singh; Saumyendra V Singh; Pooran Chand
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2012-06-23

2.  Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan: a survey among certified dental lab technicians.

Authors:  Yoshiyuki Hagiwara; Tatsuya Narita; Yohei Shioda; Keisuke Iwasaki; Takayuki Ikeda; Shunsuke Namaki; Thomas J Salinas
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2015-02-17

Review 3.  Evaluation of the quality of life and satisfaction in patients using complete dentures versus mandibular overdentures. Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sonia Egido Moreno; Raul Ayuso Montero; Mayra Schemel Suárez; Joan Valls Roca-Umbert; Keila Izquierdo Gómez; José López López
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2020-11-18

4.  Knowledge and Awareness Regarding Dental Implants among Patients Attending a Tertiary Care Center.

Authors:  Anjana Maharjan; Sagun Regmi; Reshu Agrawal Sagtani
Journal:  JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc       Date:  2018 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 0.406

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.