Mariela Machado1, Christine Wallace2, Bruce Austin3, Suhas Deshpande3, Agnes Lai3, Terry Whittle1, Iven Klineberg4. 1. Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 2. Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Oral Restorative Sciences, Westmead Centre for Oral Health, Westmead, NSW, Australia. 3. Oral Restorative Sciences, Westmead Centre for Oral Health, Westmead, NSW, Australia. 4. Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Oral Restorative Sciences, Westmead Centre for Oral Health, Westmead, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: iven.klineberg@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study has evaluated the pre and post perceptions of patients with ectodermal dysplasia (ED) who have been referred to Westmead Centre for Oral Health for treatment with dental implants. METHODS: Six patients with ED and hypodontia were treated with new maxillary complete dental prostheses or fixed implant prostheses, and a mandibular fixed dental prosthesis with implants. Patient perceptions were recorded with a 10cm visual analogue scale (VAS). All patients were asked to draw a line on the VAS which best described their feelings regarding aesthetics, chewing, diet and speech. RESULTS: Improvement in aesthetics was reported for all patients with change scores ranging from +9 to +4 points. Similarly, all patients reported an improvement in chewing ability with +6 point changes in 2 patients, and +8, +3, +7 and +1 in the other 4 patients. Five out of 6 patients reported less dietary restriction with 3 patients each indicating a change of +6 points, +4 points, +3 points, and 2 patients reporting +1 point change. Speech improved by +1 point for 3 patients, whilst 1 patient improved by +6 points, a further 2 patients scored no change. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ED treated with dental implants reported encouraging outcomes post treatment after prostheses were fitted. Follow-up from 1.6 to 6.8 years has confirmed these improvements.
PURPOSE: This study has evaluated the pre and post perceptions of patients with ectodermal dysplasia (ED) who have been referred to Westmead Centre for Oral Health for treatment with dental implants. METHODS: Six patients with ED and hypodontia were treated with new maxillary complete dental prostheses or fixed implant prostheses, and a mandibular fixed dental prosthesis with implants. Patient perceptions were recorded with a 10cm visual analogue scale (VAS). All patients were asked to draw a line on the VAS which best described their feelings regarding aesthetics, chewing, diet and speech. RESULTS: Improvement in aesthetics was reported for all patients with change scores ranging from +9 to +4 points. Similarly, all patients reported an improvement in chewing ability with +6 point changes in 2 patients, and +8, +3, +7 and +1 in the other 4 patients. Five out of 6 patients reported less dietary restriction with 3 patients each indicating a change of +6 points, +4 points, +3 points, and 2 patients reporting +1 point change. Speech improved by +1 point for 3 patients, whilst 1 patient improved by +6 points, a further 2 patients scored no change. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with ED treated with dental implants reported encouraging outcomes post treatment after prostheses were fitted. Follow-up from 1.6 to 6.8 years has confirmed these improvements.