Premium
Patient‐reported outcomes of dental implant therapy in a large randomly selected sample
Author(s) -
Derks Jan,
Håkansson Jan,
Wennström Jan L.,
Klinge Björn,
Berglundh Tord
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/clr.12464
Subject(s) - medicine , implant , dentistry , patient satisfaction , dental implant , multivariate analysis , physical therapy , surgery
Background In addition to traditional clinical parameters, the need to include patient‐reported assessments into dental implant research has been emphasized. Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate patient‐reported outcomes following implant‐supported restorative therapy in a randomly selected patient sample. Material and Methods Four thousand seven hundred and sixteen patients were randomly selected from the data register of the Swedish Social Insurance Agency. A questionnaire containing 10 questions related to implant‐supported restorative therapy was mailed to each of the individuals about 6 years after therapy. Associations between questionnaire data, and (i) patient‐related, (ii) clinician‐related and (iii) therapy‐related variables were identified by multivariate analyses. Results Three thousand eight hundred and twenty‐seven patients (81%) responded to the questionnaire. It was demonstrated that the overall satisfaction among patients was high. Older patients presented with an overall more positive perception of the results of the therapy than younger patients and males were more frequently satisfied in terms of esthetics than females. While clinical setting did not influence results, patients treated by specialist dentists as opposed to general practitioners reported a higher frequency of esthetic satisfaction and improved chewing ability. In addition, patients who had received extensive implant‐supported reconstructions, in contrast to those with small reconstructive units, reported more frequently on improved chewing ability and self‐confidence but also to a larger extent on implant‐related complications. Conclusion It is suggested that patient‐perceived outcomes of implant‐supported restorative therapy are related to (i) age and gender of the patient, (ii) the extent of restorative therapy and (iii) the clinician performing the treatment.