Post-treatment patient-reported outcome measures in a group of Thai dental implant patients
- PMID: 31254435
- DOI: 10.1111/clr.13500
Post-treatment patient-reported outcome measures in a group of Thai dental implant patients
Abstract
Objective: The aims of this study were to evaluate and analyze the factors affecting patients' perceptions and satisfaction after receiving implant treatment.
Material and methods: Questionnaires were mailed to 691 patients who had completed implant treatment for at least 6 months. The questionnaire consisted of 23 items, including demographic data, seven items on perceptions, and nine items on satisfaction.
Results: Of the returned 382 questionnaires, 188 and 194 were from patients treated by postgraduate students and specialists, respectively. Dentists were the most common main source of implant information (55.8%). Although 90% of the patients felt that they were well informed about implant treatment, some inaccurate perceptions remained: 18% believed that "Dental implants require less care than natural teeth," 35.6% that "Dental implants last longer than natural teeth," and 75% that "Treatment with dental implants has no risks or complications." Approximately 90% of the patients were satisfied with their chewing, phonetics, aesthetic outcome, and dental implant treatment; however, some were dissatisfied with the cost. Although gender, age, educational level, main source of information, implant number, and implant position had some impact on patients' perceptions and satisfaction; monthly income did not. The clinicians' expertise affected patients' perceptions, but not satisfaction.
Conclusions: Although most patients had accurate perceptions with regards to implant treatment, some misperceptions about the need for a maintenance care still exist after treatment. Most patients were satisfied with their treatment outcome regardless of monthly income and the clinicians' expertise level.
Keywords: implant therapy; patient-reported outcome measures; post-treatment.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Atieh, M. A., Morgaine, K. C., & Duncan, W. J. (2016). A qualitative analysis on participants' perspectives on oral implants. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 27(3), 383-391. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12558
-
- Baracat, L. F., Teixeira, A. M., dos Santos, M. B., da Cunha Vde, P., & Marchini, L. (2011). Patients' expectations before and evaluation after dental implant therapy. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 13(2), 141-145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00191.x
-
- Berglundh, T., Lindhe, J., Marinello, C., Ericsson, I., & Liljenberg, B. (1992). Soft tissue reaction to de novo plaque formation on implants and teeth. An experimental study in the dog. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 3(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030101.x
-
- Derks, J., Hakansson, J., Wennstrom, J. L., Klinge, B., & Berglundh, T. (2015). Patient-reported outcomes of dental implant therapy in a large randomly selected sample. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 26(5), 586-591. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12464
-
- Farzad, P., Andersson, L., Gunnarsson, S., & Sharma, P. (2004). Implant stability, tissue conditions, and patient self-evaluation after treatment with osseointegrated implants in the posterior mandible. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 6(1), 24-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2004.tb00024.x
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources