Literature DB >> 7486240

The influence of video imaging on patients' perceptions and expectations.

C Phillips1, B J Hill, C Cannac.   

Abstract

Seventy-four patients, ranging in age from 15 to 50 and presenting with a moderate to severe dentofacial deformity requiring orthognathic surgery, were randomly assigned to a video imaging or a standard case presentation (CP) group. Motives for treatment did not differ significantly between the video image and standard CP groups. Two weeks after the case presentation, 60% of the standard CP group and 74% of the video image group ranked the anticipated change in facial appearance as an important factor in making a treatment decision. Seventy percent of the standard CP group and 83% of the video image group agreed with the statement that surgery would be necessary to correct their problem. In the standard CP group, 47% of the patients ranked dental casts as the most helpful physical record in making a treatment decision, and 46% said the acetate profile tracing was the most helpful tool for understanding what to expect from treatment. In the video imaging group, 42% of the patients said the video imaging presentation was the most helpful tool in making a treatment decision, and 39% of the patients said it was the most helpful tool for understanding treatment expectations. The proportion of patients in the video image case presentation group with elevated self-image expectations following treatment was significantly higher (P = .045) than in the standard case presentation group. The presentation of video images appears to be a valuable information source for conveying treatment options to patients, but caution may be needed to prevent elevated or possibly unrealistic treatment expectations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7486240     DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1995)065<0263:TIOVIO>2.0.CO;2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  7 in total

1.  Long-term follow-up of Class II adults treated with orthodontic camouflage: a comparison with orthognathic surgery outcomes.

Authors:  Colin A Mihalik; William R Proffit; Ceib Phillips
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.650

2.  Effects of a computerized treatment simulation on patient expectations for orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  C Phillips; L Bailey; H A Kiyak; D Bloomquist
Journal:  Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg       Date:  2001

Review 3.  Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review.

Authors:  A M O'Connor; A Rostom; V Fiset; J Tetroe; V Entwistle; H Llewellyn-Thomas; M Holmes-Rovner; M Barry; J Jones
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

4.  Patient-centered outcomes in surgical and orthodontic treatment.

Authors:  C Phillips
Journal:  Semin Orthod       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 0.970

Review 5.  On what basis should the effectiveness of decision aids be judged?

Authors:  Andrew D M Kennedy
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Perceptions of recovery and satisfaction in the short term after orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  Ceib Phillips; H Asuman Kiyak; Dale Bloomquist; Timothy A Turvey
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 1.895

Review 7.  Patients' expectations to dental implant: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Jie Yao; Hua Tang; Xiao-Li Gao; Colman McGrath; Nikos Mattheos
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 3.186

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.