| HOME | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
elebi
1
-Zlatari
1
2
i
1
1
1 Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Croatia.
2 Department of Practical Sciences, University of Split, Croatia.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods. A total of 222 patients with CDs took a part in this study. A questionnaire divided into 3 parts was completed by both the patients and the dentist, independently. The patients rated their dentures using a scale ranging from 1 to 5 (1 = dissatisfaction to 5 = excellent), and a dentist rated the quality of the denture and the denture-bearing area.
Results. Patients were mostly satisfied with the quality of their CDs. Only 7.2% of the patients were absolutely not satisfied with their dentures. Patients with a low level of education were more satisfied in general with their aesthetic appearance. Patients with better self-perception of their affective status and quality of life showed higher levels of general satisfaction. Patients with better self-perception of their economic status showed lower levels of satisfaction. Younger patients wearing dentures for the first time, with short periods of being edentulous, and with better quality maxillary denture-bearing areas were more satisfied with the retention of maxillary CDs. In contrast, younger patients with first-time dentures, a short period of being edentulous, and with better quality mandibular denture-bearing areas gave lower ratings to the retention and comfort of wearing mandibular dentures.
Conclusions. Level of education, self-perception of affective and economic status, and quality of life are all related to patient satisfaction. However, the quality of dentures shows the strongest correlation with patient satisfaction. Not only the quality of the denture-bearing area but the denture-wearing experience itself seems to be more important in determining patient satisfaction with mandibular CDs.
According to Berg (7), construction of a good complete set of dentures depends on technical, biological, and physiological interactions between the patient and dentist. The great majority of patients are satisfied with their complete dentures (2). However, even if the dentures are constructed to all accepted criteria, some patients will still be dissatisfied with their prosthetic treatment and new dentures.
In a number of studies over the past 30 years, the proportion of full-denture patients who are dissatisfied with new and well-made prostheses are found to range between 10% and 15% (8,9). The degree of satisfaction appears to decrease rapidly during the first couple of years after insertion (9). In epidemiological studies on patients' satisfaction with their dentures of varying ages and qualities, the proportion of unsatisfied patients is reported to range between 20% and 35% (3,4,712).
However, many patients are satisfied and have adapted to their inadequate complete dentures (12,13). Patients' evaluations of their prostheses sometimes neither correlate with the clinicians' assessments nor with anatomic factors (1417). Evaluation of patients' acceptance and satisfaction with their complete denture therapy is limited by the various methods used in collecting and rating all the influential factors (7,1831), such as number of corrections after insertion, psychological characteristics of patients, self-evaluation of affective state or of quality of life, demographic and socioeconomic factors (e.g., age, gender, level of education, level of income, transcultural differences), patient expectation of dentures, quality of denture construction, occlusal factors, factors that are connected with anatomic and physiologic characteristics of the patient (e.g., degree of alveolar ridge resorption, quality of saliva, tongue hypertrophy, status of oral mucosa, quality of denture-bearing area). According to Berg (7), Sato (24), and Van der Waas (25), seven factors are the most important in assessing patient satisfaction with complete denture therapy.
The aim of this study was to evaluate patients' overall satisfaction with their complete dentures of various age and quality as well as to evaluate their satisfaction with denture retention, speech, chewing ability, and the comfort of wearing dentures. Also, the aim was to relate the influence of some factors (e.g., age, gender, level of education, level of income, self-evaluation of affective status, economic status and quality of life, period of denture-wearing experience, number of previous dentures worn, duration of edentulousness, quality of denture-bearing area, and quality of dentures) with patient satisfaction.
| PATIENTS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In the second part, the patients were required to answer questions regarding gender, age, level of education (1 = 8 years of primary school, 2 = 3 years of vocational school, 3 = 4 years of gymnasium, 4 = 2 to 3 years of high school,5 = university level), marital status (married, divorced, single, or widowed), self-supporting lifestyle (1 = ability to live by themselves, 2 = supported by their families, and 3 = able to live alone), smoking habits, period of tooth loss, period of wearing present dentures, and number of previous complete dentures worn.
Patients were also asked to assess their economic status (depending on their assessment of level of income and housing tenure), affective status (depending on patients' self-evaluation of loneliness, helplessness, and relationships with friends, children, and partners), and quality of life (evaluating the contribution of their health problems, daily exercise, fatigue, sleep quality, physical comfort, mutual communication, and hobbies). The 15 scale was used, where 1 = poor quality and 5 = excellent quality.
In the third part of the questionnaire, patients were required to rate their complete dentures, depending on the level of satisfaction. They first rated them in general, and then they rated separately retention, aesthetics, speech ability, chewing ability, and comfort of wearing maxillary and mandibular complete dentures (CDs). The patients rated them by using a scale ranging from 1 to 5 (where 1 = dissatisfaction and 5 = excellent), which is a common grading scale used in the Croatian educational system.
The first part of the questionnaire was completed by the dentist. Prior to the assessment, three different dentists (Specialists of Prosthodontics) separately evaluated the maxillary and mandibular denture-bearing areas, as well as the quality of dentures in 35 patients. The Kappa test (0.760.94) revealed sufficient consistency between the dentists, but it was decided that only one dentist should evaluate all patients. In evaluation of the maxillary denture-bearing area, the Kappa value between the first and second dentist was 0.88, between the first and third dentist it was 0.88, and between the second and third dentist it was 0.76. In evaluation of the mandibular denture-bearing area, the Kappa value between the first and second dentist was 0.82, between the first and third dentist it was 0.94, and between the second and third dentist it was 0.76. In the evaluation of quality of dentures, the Kappa value between the first and second dentist was 0.94, between the first and third dentist it was 0.82, and between the second and third dentist it was 0.76.
The subsequent statistical analysis was made by using the statistical software SPSS 10.0 for Windows (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL). Descriptive statistics were made and the normality of distribution was tested by the one-way Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Finally, in order to test the relation between patient satisfaction and the different variables, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was calculated. The Mann-Whitney U was used to test the significance of differences between gender and smoking habits.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The biggest percentage of the patients had a medium level of education (primary school + 4 years of gymnasium or vocational school) (54%), 31% of the patients had a low level of education (primary school), and 15% of the patients had a high school and/or university level of education.
Patients were divided into 3 age groups: <50 years, 50 to 65 years, and >65 years. According to the number of previous dentures, 31% of the patients were first-time complete denture wearers, 53% of the patients had their second set of CDs, 13% had their third CDs, 2% had their fourth, and 16% had their fifth pair of CDs.
Twenty percent of patients were edentulous over a period of 1 year, 32 were edentulous over a period ranging from 1 to 5 years, and 48% were edentulous for more than 5 years. Depending on how old the existing CDs were, 39% of CDs had been in use for 1 year, 42% had been in use for 1 to 5 years, and 19% were more than 5 years old.
Percent distribution of the frequencies, for the variables assessed by the patients (scale from 1 to 5), depending on how satisfied they were with their CDs, are shown in Figure 1. The ratings of patient assessments of their dentures were surprisingly high. More than half of the examined patients claimed all the examined variables to be in the highest category and only 7.2% of the patients were absolutely dissatisfied with CDs. The parameters with the best ratings (the highest percentage of the best ratings) were as follows: retention of maxillary CDs was 78.4%, speech was 79.3%, comfort of wearing a maxillary CD was 88.7%, and aesthetics was 72.1%. Parameters with the highest percent of the lowest ratings: retention of mandibular CDs was 14.4% and comfort of wearing mandibular CDs was 11.7%. The normality of the distribution for patients' assessment of their CDs in general, retention of maxillary and mandibular CDs, speech, mastication, and comfort differed from the normal distribution (p <.05), as tested by one-way Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
|
|
|
|
The level of education was negatively correlated with general satisfaction, aesthetics, speech, and comfort of wearing maxillary dentures (p <.05). Patients with a low level of education were significantly more satisfied in general and were more satisfied with the aesthetics of their dentures, speech, and comfort of wearing maxillary dentures than patients with a higher level of education.
The number of previous dentures was negatively correlated with retention of maxillary dentures, and was positively correlated with retention of mandibular dentures (p <.05). Patients who had more than two previous dentures gave lower ratings to retention of their maxillary CDs, but surprisingly, they gave higher ratings to retention of mandibular CDs than patients with first-time dentures.
The period of edentulousness was negatively correlated with retention of maxillary dentures and was positively correlated with retention of mandibular dentures (p <.05) (more years edentulous: lower ratings for retention of maxillary CD and higher ratings for retention of mandibular CD).
The age of existing dentures was negatively correlated with aesthetics and positively correlated with general satisfaction, chewing, retention of mandibular dentures, and comfort of wearing mandibular dentures (p <.05) (older dentures were scored lower for aesthetics and higher for chewing, general satisfaction, retention, and comfort of wearing mandibular dentures).
Patients with lower ratings for self-percepted economic status gave higher ratings to general satisfaction with CDs (economic status and general satisfaction with dentures were negatively correlated) (p <.05).
Patients who were more satisfied with their affect gave better ratings to general satisfaction and aesthetics (positive correlation, p <.05).
Patients who were more satisfied with the quality of their life gave higher ratings to overall satisfaction (positive correlation, p <.05).
The quality of the maxillary denture-bearing area was positively correlated with retention of maxillary dentures, comfort of wearing maxillary dentures, and chewing (p <.01). Patients with lower quality maxillary denture-bearing areas gave lower ratings for retention of maxillary CD, comfort, and chewing than those patients with higher quality maxillary denture-bearing areas. Surprisingly, a negative correlation existed between the quality of the mandibular denture-bearing area and retention (p <.05), as well as the comfort of wearing mandibular dentures (p <.01), general satisfaction, and chewing (p <.05). Patients whose mandibular denture-bearing area was assessed as excellent and very good gave the lowest ratings to overall satisfaction, retention of mandibular CD, chewing quality, and comfort of wearing mandibular dentures. However, the strongest correlation existed between the dentist's assessment of the quality of the dentures and patients' general satisfaction (
=.61, p <.01), as well as with the patients' satisfaction with retention of mandibular dentures (
=.59, p <.01), chewing, retention of maxillary dentures, speech, aesthetics, and comfort of wearing mandibular and maxillary dentures (p <.01) (Table 1).
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
According to the results of this study, it is clear that the distribution curve showing the patients' assessments related to CDs is visibly and entirely skewed toward the highest score area (modal values and median values were 5 for all categories). Lamb and colleagues (26), who tested the level of satisfaction of their patients by using the visual analogue scale from 1 to 10, had a different result distribution than "normal" (as in the present study). Their distribution was bimodal, with results clustering around 2.5 and 7.5, which agreed with the satisfied and dissatisfied patients and was not skewed towards the highest scores.
Spearman's rank coefficients of correlation (
) revealed that there was no significant correlation between gender or smoking habits and level of patients' satisfaction with their CDs, which is in accordance with the study of Golebiewska and colleagues (19). On the contrary, Awad and Feine (17) suggest that a patient's satisfaction with their CDs is highly dependent on gender.
Patients with a lower level of education were more satisfied in general and with speech, aesthetics, and comfort of wearing maxillary CD. This is probably due to the fact that less-educated patients have a lower level of expectations or find the handicap of being edentulous to be less irritating. This is also found in other studies (see 15,16,22,28). The better the self-perception of affective status and quality of life, the more satisfied patients were in general (p <.05). This was also in agreement with several other findings (see 19,20,22,25,28). Self-perception of economic status and patients' satisfaction with their dentures were weakly negatively correlated (the better the economic status, the lesser the satisfaction). This is in agreement with other studies (1820,22,23) and points out the importance of personality profiles and psychological factors on the level of satisfaction in patients. However, patients with better self-perception of their quality of life (well-being) were more satisfied in general with their dentures and chewing ability, and patients who were more satisfied with their affective status were also more satisfied with their dentures in general, as well as with aesthetics and speech.
However, the quality of patients' dentures showed the strongest correlation with patients' satisfaction, which is not a surprising finding. It was surprising that the patients with the best quality mandibular denture-bearing areas gave worse ratings to their overall satisfaction than patients with lower quality denture-bearing areas. However, these patients also gave worse ratings to retention of mandibular CDs, chewing ability, and comfort of wearing mandibular CDs than patients with better quality mandibular residual ridges. Makilla (31) found a significant correlation between quality of the denture-bearing area and patient satisfaction, while Carlsson and colleagues (8), Berg (9), and Van der Waas (27) did not. Our study showed a weak negative correlation between the quality of the mandibular denture-bearing area and general satisfaction, but the quality of the denture-bearing area was strongly correlated with the retention and comfort of wearing dentures (positively for maxillary dentures, negatively for mandibular dentures).
In assessment of retention of maxillary CDs, older patients and patients with longer period of being edentulous and a greater number of previous dentures gave lower ratings than younger patients with a shorter time of being edentulous. However, worse ratings for retention were given by patients with lower quality maxillary denture-bearing areas as well. It is well known that resorption of residual alveolar ridges, which reduces maxillary denture retention, progresses with edentulousness and age (32,33).
A surprising result concerns retention of mandibular CDs. Younger patients with the lowest number of previous dentures (first-ever CDs), the smallest period of being edentulous, and with the best quality mandibular denture-bearing areas assessed the retention of their mandibular CDs with lower scores than patients who had a greater number of previous dentures, longer periods of edentulousness, and lower quality mandibular denture-bearing areas. This points out that the patients with the best residual alveolar ridges in the mandible and with the best quality denture-bearing areas gave the worst scores. This could be ascribed to the obviously long period of neuromuscular adaptation to the mandibular CD and the long period necessary for the muscles of the lips, cheek, and tongue, which surround the lower denture, to adapt their function to the denture flanges. The comfort of wearing maxillary dentures was higher in patients with good denture-bearing areas (better retention and stability) and, in contrast, the comfort of wearing mandibular CDs was lower in those with high quality mandibular residual ridges (nonresorbed ridges). Although we had expected to find that patients with high quality mandibular denture-bearing areas would be more satisfied, that was not found in the results. However, residual ridge resorption is a chronic, continuous process that is more rapid after tooth extraction. The residual alveolar ridge is highest immediately after extraction, and support for a mandibular CD should be optimal. Most likely due to the long period of neuromuscular adaptation (and to the possible undercutting of residual ridges immediately after extraction), mandibular dentures move and damage oral mucosa, thus causing discomfort, unfavorable retention, and low levels of chewing ability and general satisfaction.
| CONCLUSIONS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
elebi
, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Gunduli
eva 5, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia. E-mail: dkz{at}email.hinet.hr Received September 24, 2002
Accepted December 2, 2002
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Zlatari
D,
elebi
A, Kobler P. Relationship between body mass index and local quality of mandibular bone structure in elderly. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci.. 2002;57A:M588-M593.
Zlatari
D,
elebi
A. The Influence of gender and age on the values of linear radiomorphometric indices measured on the lower border of the mandible. Acta Stomatol Croat.. 2002;36:191-197.
elebi
A, Valenti
-Peruzovi
M, Stipeti
J, Deli
Z, Stani
i
T, Ibrahimagi
L. The patient's and the therapist's evaluation of complete denture therapy. Coll Antropol.. 2002;24:(Suppl): 71-78.
, Zlatari
D,
elebi
A. Treatment outcomes with removable partial dentures: A comparison between patient and prosthodontist assessment. Int J Prosthodont.. 2001;14:423-426.[Medline]
J,
elebi
A, Jerolimov V, Vinter I, Kraljevi
S, Raji
Z. The patient's and the therapist's evaluation of bridges of different materials and age. Coll Antropol.. 2002;24:(Suppl): 25-30.
Zlatari
D,
elebi
A, Valenti
-Peruzovi
M. The effect of removable partial dentures on periodontal health of abutment and non-abutment teeth. J Periodontol.. 2002;73:137-144.[Medline]
Zlatari
D,
elebi
A, Valenti
-Peruzovi
M,
eli
R, Filipovi
-Zore I, Bau
i
M. The satisfaction with the removable partial denture therapy in the Croatian adult population. Coll Antropol.. 2000;24:485-494.[Medline]
elebi
A, Kova
i
I, Carek V, Bau
i
I, Stipeti
J, Knezovi
Zlatari
D. Alveolar ridge resorption in complete denture wearers. One year study. Calcif Tissue Int.. 2002;70:99.[Medline]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|