George Deeb1, Bryan Wheeler2, Margaret Jones3, Caroline Carrico4, Daniel Laskin5, Janina Golob Deeb6. 1. Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. Electronic address: gdeeb@vcu.edu. 2. Chief Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. 3. Student, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Research Administration, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. 5. Professor Emeritus, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. 6. Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The more informed a patient is about a given procedure, the better the ultimate outcome. This study was designed to compare general public awareness and knowledge regarding oral implant treatment with those of patients presenting for such treatment and to determine the sources from which they may have obtained such information, as well as the accuracy of the information. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 2 groups of patients were asked to complete a questionnaire containing implant knowledge questions and questions regarding any sources they may have used to obtain information about dental implants. Group I consisted of patients presenting for treatment of a dental emergency (general population group), and group II consisted of patients presenting for an implant consultation. The χ2 test was used to determine whether there were differences in knowledge and information sources between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 126 adult patients (76 dental emergency patients and 50 implant consultation patients) participated in the study. The general population group was less informed about dental implants, especially information relating to implant material and longevity, and received information from less reliable sources than patients presenting for implant screening (friends or relatives vs primary dentist). Both groups reported cost of the procedure as a primary barrier to receiving implants (89% and 90%). CONCLUSIONS: There is still a need for continued education of the general public regarding dental implants.
PURPOSE: The more informed a patient is about a given procedure, the better the ultimate outcome. This study was designed to compare general public awareness and knowledge regarding oral implant treatment with those of patients presenting for such treatment and to determine the sources from which they may have obtained such information, as well as the accuracy of the information. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 2 groups of patients were asked to complete a questionnaire containing implant knowledge questions and questions regarding any sources they may have used to obtain information about dental implants. Group I consisted of patients presenting for treatment of a dental emergency (general population group), and group II consisted of patients presenting for an implant consultation. The χ2 test was used to determine whether there were differences in knowledge and information sources between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 126 adult patients (76 dental emergency patients and 50 implant consultation patients) participated in the study. The general population group was less informed about dental implants, especially information relating to implant material and longevity, and received information from less reliable sources than patients presenting for implant screening (friends or relatives vs primary dentist). Both groups reported cost of the procedure as a primary barrier to receiving implants (89% and 90%). CONCLUSIONS: There is still a need for continued education of the general public regarding dental implants.