RESUMO
Introduction: Patient satisfaction is important for ensuring patient’s adherence in orthodontic treatment. As teaching institutions, dental college clinics must constantly strive to find a balance between satisfyingthe needs of the patients and ensuring proper training of the students. The objective of the present studywas to assess dental patient’s satisfaction with orthodontic treatment and related services at King Khalid University,College of Dentistry (KKU COD), Saudi Arabia. Materials and methods: A 19 item closed end questionnaire was developed and pretested to assess patient’s satisfaction with orthodontic care. The questionnaire items were designed under three domains: 1) Reception and work environment, 2) doctor-patient relationship, and 3) treatment expectations and satisfaction. The study sample consisted of all patients consulting the orthodontic clinics during the time frame of the survey and those who were willing to participate. Results: A total of 72 patients completed the survey within the time framework. The mean age of the patients was 21.2 ± 8.06 of which males were 69.5% and Females 30.5%. The highest subscale score was found to be with patient’s treatment expectations and satisfaction (92.6%) followed by reception and work environment (89.3%) and Dentist-patient relationship (82.7%). The overall patient’s satisfaction for orthodontic services among the patients was found to be 87.1%. Conclusion: There was a high dental patient’s satisfaction with orthodontic services at COD KKU, Saudi Arabia as a teaching institution.The dentist-relationship wasfound to be key factor in determining dental patient’s satisfaction.
RESUMO
Objective: A parallel design clinical study evaluated reduction in hypersensitivity after brushing for 12 weeks with Anchor toothpaste (containing potassium citrate, zinc citrate, triclosan and sodium monofluorophosphate) (test) and Colgate Total (sodium fluoride, silica, triclosan and copolymer) (control) dentifrices. Materials and Methods: Sixty adults with sensitivity to hot and cold stimulus in at least two tooth surfaces were stratified at the baseline examination by tactile, hot and cold stimuli scores in two balanced groups. Subjects were randomly allocated the test and control dentifrices and evaluated after 6 and 12 weeks of dentifrice use for hypersensitivity. Results: The two teeth that were selected in each patient were designated as two different sets. The 12 th -week scores as compared to baseline scores for tactile, heat and cold tests in the test group showed a reduction in tooth hypersensitivity by 36.67% (P < 0.01), 20.35% (P < 0.01) and 53.64 % (P < 0.01), respectively, in the first set of teeth and 43.75% (P < 0.01), 24.48% (P < 0.01) and 59.78% (P < 0.01), respectively, in the second set of teeth. The 12 th -week scores as compared to baseline scores for tactile, heat and cold tests in the control group showed a reduction in tooth hypersensitivity by 42.86% (P < 0.01), 13.02% (P < 0.01) and 45.14% (P < 0.01), respectively, in the first set of teeth and 40% (P < 0.01), 16.59% (P < 0.01) and 44.16% (P < 0.01), respectively, in the second set of teeth. Conclusions: Both the products reduced dentinal hypersensitivity in the study subjects at the end of the 12-week period. However, there was no statistically significant difference in reduction in hypersensitivity between the two products.