Are there differences in the changes in oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) depending on the type (rigidity) of prosthetic treatment?

Bassetti, Renzo Giulio; Mericske, Regina; Enkling, Norbert (2016). Are there differences in the changes in oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) depending on the type (rigidity) of prosthetic treatment? Quintessence international, 47(9), pp. 749-757. Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH 10.3290/j.qi.a36384

Full text not available from this repository.

OBJECTIVE

This prospective pilot study investigated differences in changes in oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) depending on the prosthetic treatment type (rigidity).

METHOD AND MATERIALS

Sixty participants seeking prosthetic treatment were included. The following data were collected before (T1) and 4 weeks after completion of prosthetic treatment (T2): OHRQoL (OHIP-G14) and dental status, categorized in terms of rigidity of the denture as fixed dental prosthesis (FDP, maximal rigidity), removable partial denture prosthesis (RPD, medium rigidity), or complete dentures (CDs, minimal rigidity). After prosthetic treatment, there were three groups of 20 participants: group 1, change in dental status to less rigid; group 2, equally rigid; group 3, more rigid restorations. Data were evaluated using nonparametric statistical test methods and power analysis. The minimally important difference (MID) of two OHIP-G14 units was determined to be clinically relevant.

RESULTS

At T1, 20 participants had FDP, 18 RPD, and 22 CD; at T2, 10 had FDP, 37 RPD, and 13 CD. Overall, average OHIP-G14 values improved clinically relevantly and statistically significantly (P < .001) with treatment. OHRQoL improved more in group 3, with a median of 8 (IQR 14.75; P = .002), than in group 2, with 2.5 (IQR 9.5; P = .033), or group 1, with 4.5 (IQR 16.5; P = .116). Applying MID, all groups improved clinically significantly. Compared to groups 1 and 2, group 3 improved clinically more significantly.

CONCLUSION

OHRQoL improved with prosthetic treatment. A patient-customized treatment regime seems as important as prosthesis type (rigidity).

Item Type:	Journal Article (Original Article)
Division/Institute:	04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine > Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology
UniBE Contributor:	Mericske, Regina, Enkling, Norbert
Subjects:	600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
ISSN:	0033-6572
Publisher:	Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH
Language:	English
Submitter:	Eveline Carmen Schuler
Date Deposited:	20 Jan 2017 14:41
Last Modified:	05 Dec 2022 15:00
Publisher DOI:	10.3290/j.qi.a36384
PubMed ID:	27341467
URI:	https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/91263