Complications and Patient Satisfaction in Fully Edentulous Patients Treated with a Digital and Conventional Complete Denture, A Cross-Over Clinical Study.

Kathleen Smets, Rani D'haese, Lisa Bultinck, Stefan Vandeweghe, Carine Matthys
{"title":"Complications and Patient Satisfaction in Fully Edentulous Patients Treated with a Digital and Conventional Complete Denture, A Cross-Over Clinical Study.","authors":"Kathleen Smets, Rani D'haese, Lisa Bultinck, Stefan Vandeweghe, Carine Matthys","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of this clinical study was to evaluate comfort, satisfaction, chewing ability and complications with digital complete dentures (DCD) and conventional complete dentures (CCD).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>For 16 edentulous patients, two sets of upper and lower dentures were fabricated by students in a university dental clinic. The impression for the DCD was done using indirect scanning of the cast. When the patients were pain free, each set of dentures was worn for four weeks. OHIP-14 and a DSI (Denture Satisfaction Index)were used to measure patient satisfaction and chewing ability respectively. Both questionnaires were administered before fabrication and after wearing each set. Adjustments made during the follow up period were included. At the end of the study, patients could express which set of dentures they preferred. The 25 dental students involved in fabricating the dentures, were questioned in terms of discomfort, preference and future use for both techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OHIP-14 showed significantly higher scores for the DCD for the domain concerning psychological discomfort. DSI showed no significant difference for both sets of dentures. In terms of complications, a significant difference was found for occlusion. The DCD required more occlusal adjustments. A minority of the patients (37.5%) chose the DCD as their favourite set. The students preferred the wax try-in and workflow of the CCD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CCD and DCD showed differences in patient satisfaction. Chewing ability was comparable for both sets of dentures. More occlusal complications were seen in the DCD. Both students and patients preferred the CCD.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this clinical study was to evaluate comfort, satisfaction, chewing ability and complications with digital complete dentures (DCD) and conventional complete dentures (CCD).

Materials and methods: For 16 edentulous patients, two sets of upper and lower dentures were fabricated by students in a university dental clinic. The impression for the DCD was done using indirect scanning of the cast. When the patients were pain free, each set of dentures was worn for four weeks. OHIP-14 and a DSI (Denture Satisfaction Index)were used to measure patient satisfaction and chewing ability respectively. Both questionnaires were administered before fabrication and after wearing each set. Adjustments made during the follow up period were included. At the end of the study, patients could express which set of dentures they preferred. The 25 dental students involved in fabricating the dentures, were questioned in terms of discomfort, preference and future use for both techniques.

Results: OHIP-14 showed significantly higher scores for the DCD for the domain concerning psychological discomfort. DSI showed no significant difference for both sets of dentures. In terms of complications, a significant difference was found for occlusion. The DCD required more occlusal adjustments. A minority of the patients (37.5%) chose the DCD as their favourite set. The students preferred the wax try-in and workflow of the CCD.

Conclusions: The CCD and DCD showed differences in patient satisfaction. Chewing ability was comparable for both sets of dentures. More occlusal complications were seen in the DCD. Both students and patients preferred the CCD.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用数字化和传统全口义齿治疗全口无牙颌患者的并发症和患者满意度,一项交叉临床研究。
目的:本临床研究旨在评估数码全口义齿(DCD)和传统全口义齿(CCD)的舒适度、满意度、咀嚼能力和并发症:材料和方法:一所大学牙科诊所的学生为 16 名无牙颌患者制作了上下两套义齿。DCD 的印模是通过间接扫描铸模完成的。当患者无疼痛感时,每套假牙佩戴四周。OHIP-14和DSI(义齿满意度指数)分别用于测量患者的满意度和咀嚼能力。两份问卷均在每套假牙制作前和佩戴后进行。随访期间的调整也包括在内。研究结束时,患者可以表达他们更喜欢哪套假牙。参与制作假牙的 25 名牙科学生就两种技术的不适感、偏好和未来使用情况接受了询问:OHIP-14显示,DCD在心理不适方面的得分明显更高。两种假牙的 DSI 没有明显差异。在并发症方面,咬合有明显差异。DCD 需要进行更多的咬合调整。少数患者(37.5%)选择 DCD 作为他们最喜欢的假牙。学生们更喜欢CCD的蜡试戴和工作流程:结论:CCD和DCD在患者满意度方面存在差异。两套假牙的咀嚼能力相当。DCD 的咬合并发症较多。学生和患者都更喜欢 CCD。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Digital Workflow for Rehabilitation of Severely Discolored Teeth Due to Red Staining from Endodontic Material. Influence of Different Cements on Bonding Efficiency Between Implant Abutment and Standard Restoration. Thirty-Year Clinical Performance of Double-Crown Retained Removable Partial Dentures - A Practice-Based Retrospective Study. Evaluation of the Bond Strengths Between Dental Ceramics and Co-Cr Frameworks Made with Digital and Conventional Techniques. 3D-Printed Permanent Resin Crowns on Pre-Molar and Molar Teeth; Two-Year Results of a Prospective Clinical Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1