PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare patients' and dentists' perception of dental appearance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on internationally accepted guidelines about dental esthetics, a questionnaire was developed to measure "dental appearance" (QDA). Eleven items defined a QDA score (0 = "absolutely dissatisfied" to 100 = "absolutely satisfied"). The QDA was completed by 29 patients (21 women, 8 men) before and after a complete oral rehabilitation that included restoration of the maxillary anterior teeth. Overall, 94 dentists from four countries (Germany, the United Kingdom, China, and Switzerland) evaluated the esthetics before and after rehabilitation on a visual analog scale (VAS: 0 = "absolutely unesthetic" to 100 = "absolutely esthetic"). RESULTS: Patients and dentists of all countries found a significant esthetic improvement after treatment (P ≤ .0001). Significant differences could be found when comparing the evaluation of the dentists from the various countries among one another and with the patients' self-evaluation (P ≤ .05). With the exception of the professional rating of the initial situation, no gender-related differences could be found in any of the test groups. CONCLUSIONS: In daily practice, it seems of utmost importance for dentists to incorporate the patients' feedback in order to avoid esthetic treatment failures.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare patients' and dentists' perception of dental appearance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on internationally accepted guidelines about dental esthetics, a questionnaire was developed to measure "dental appearance" (QDA). Eleven items defined a QDA score (0 = "absolutely dissatisfied" to 100 = "absolutely satisfied"). The QDA was completed by 29 patients (21 women, 8 men) before and after a complete oral rehabilitation that included restoration of the maxillary anterior teeth. Overall, 94 dentists from four countries (Germany, the United Kingdom, China, and Switzerland) evaluated the esthetics before and after rehabilitation on a visual analog scale (VAS: 0 = "absolutely unesthetic" to 100 = "absolutely esthetic"). RESULTS:Patients and dentists of all countries found a significant esthetic improvement after treatment (P ≤ .0001). Significant differences could be found when comparing the evaluation of the dentists from the various countries among one another and with the patients' self-evaluation (P ≤ .05). With the exception of the professional rating of the initial situation, no gender-related differences could be found in any of the test groups. CONCLUSIONS: In daily practice, it seems of utmost importance for dentists to incorporate the patients' feedback in order to avoid esthetic treatment failures.