Literature DB >> 23328196

Quality of life of patients with implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses: a prospective and retrospective study.

Secil Karakoca Nemli1, Cemal Aydin, Handan Yilmaz, Bilge Turhan Bal, Yeliz Kasko Arici.   

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Clinical studies on implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses have focused on biological outcomes. An assessment of the effect of prostheses on patients' quality of life (QOL) by using specific questionnaires developed for this patient population provides important information on treatment outcomes from the patients' perspectives.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report patient-based outcomes of implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses and to evaluate the effect of implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses on QOL of participants in a prospective study.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighty-two participants were treated with implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses. Participants were divided into 2 groups: a retrospective group (participants treated and under care) and a prospective group (participants willing to be treated). The posttreatment patient satisfaction scores for each question were statistically analyzed by 2-way ANOVA with variables of defect type and retention type. The Student-Newman-Keuls test was used to determine any significant differences among the groups. In the prospective group, mean scores before and after prosthetic treatment were compared with the paired t test (α=.05).
RESULTS: The details of 54 retrospective and 28 prospective participants were reviewed. The posttreatment results of 82 patients showed that patient satisfaction with implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses was significantly different for cleaning the prostheses and recommending treatment to other people, depending on the defect and retention type. In the prospective group, participants reported significant increases in satisfaction for all questions.
CONCLUSIONS: Implant-retained prostheses were considered highly satisfactory, indicating good QOL for patients with maxillofacial defects. A comparison of pretreatment and posttreatment assessments revealed that implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses increased patient QOL.
Copyright © 2013 The Editorial Council of the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23328196     DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60010-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  5 in total

1.  Validation of the Turkish version of the Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire version 3 (LORQv3) in prosthetically rehabilitated patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Kadriye Peker; Meltem Ozdemir-Karatas; Ali Balık; Esma Kürklü; Omer Uysal; Simon N Rogers
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2014-10-22       Impact factor: 2.757

2.  Management of High-energy Avulsive Ballistic Facial Injury: A Review of the Literature and Algorithmic Approach.

Authors:  Elbert E Vaca; Justin L Bellamy; Sammy Sinno; Eduardo D Rodriguez
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2018-03-19

Review 3.  Unraveling of Advances in 3D-Printed Polymer-Based Bone Scaffolds.

Authors:  Yuanhang Xu; Feiyang Zhang; Weijie Zhai; Shujie Cheng; Jinghua Li; Yi Wang
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 4.329

4.  Monoscopic photogrammetry to obtain 3D models by a mobile device: a method for making facial prostheses.

Authors:  Rodrigo Salazar-Gamarra; Rosemary Seelaus; Jorge Vicente Lopes da Silva; Airton Moreira da Silva; Luciano Lauria Dib
Journal:  J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2016-05-25

Review 5.  Outcome measures in facial prosthesis research: A systematic review.

Authors:  Rachael Y Jablonski; Benjamin J Veale; Trevor J Coward; Andrew J Keeling; Chris Bojke; Sue H Pavitt; Brian R Nattress
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 3.426

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.