Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop ; 158(3): 371-382, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32709577

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: A growing number of adult patients are seeking orthodontic treatment. This research aimed to analyze the particulars of patients seeking retreatment and identify the causes of their original treatment failure. METHODS: An online questionnaire survey of adults seeking first-time orthodontic treatment (control) and retreatment (study) was conducted. Index of complexity, outcome, and need (ICON) scores were determined. Appraisal of treatment records was carried out to identify the causes of original treatment failure. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between retreatment adult patients and first-timers regarding reasons for seeking orthodontic treatment, malocclusion type, self-perception of malocclusion, level of self-motivation, willingness for surgery, expectations of treatment improvement and duration. The predominant reason for seeking treatment in both groups was for aesthetic concerns. Retreatment patients presented with lower ICON scores (39.4; standard error, 0.26) than the first-time patients (54.3; standard error, 0.23), P ≤0.001. The predominant reasons for original treatment failings were poor treatment, maturational changes, inadequate retention, shortcomings in diagnosis and treatment planning, and unfavorable growth. Other causes were related to transverse deficiency, secondary malocclusion (after periodontal breakdown), poor retention compliance, and temporomandibular joint degeneration. CONCLUSIONS: Adult orthodontic retreatment and first-time seekers' profiles are remarkably similar. Aesthetic concerns were the leading reasons patients sought treatment. ICON was not a useful proxy of patient profiles. Poor treatment was the chief reason for the failure of the original treatment. In terms of clinical significance, clinicians should be mindful of the patient profiles of retreatment seekers and vigilant about the possible causes of failings of orthodontic treatment to avoid suboptimal outcomes.


Subject(s)
Esthetics, Dental , Malocclusion , Adult , Humans , Orthodontics, Corrective , Retreatment , Self Concept , Surveys and Questionnaires
2.
Clin Oral Implants Res ; 30(3): 261-276, 2019 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30714227

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and treatment outcomes of mandibular two-implant retained overdentures (IOD) in an edentulous geriatric cohort with history of deficient complete dentures (CD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 103 patients with deficient CD received new optimal CD. After a period of 3 months, 80 of the patients voluntarily received IOD. Outcomes collected at pre-, post-CD/post-IOD treatment annually up to 5 years, included (a) Clinical outcomes: denture-quality (Woelfel's index), complications, and maintenance events, (b) PROMs: patient complaints (maxillary, mandibular functional complaint scores, generic aesthetic complaint scores, frequency, and intensity of complaints) and patient satisfaction, and (c) Maintenance events: technical complications and adverse events. RESULTS: Five-year data were collected from 67 patients (mean age at initiation = 71.3 years, mean observation = 5.9 years) with cumulative implant survival rate = 98.72%. Multiple comparisons for 8 time points showed significant improvements in denture quality and PROMs after new CD and IOD delivery. Further significant improvements were only after IOD delivery in: mandibular denture-quality, mandibular and generic functional complaints, frequency, intensity of complaints, and overall patient satisfaction score. Thereafter, denture-quality and PROMs remained stable. Maintenance events clustered on 1st year and within a minority of patients. Technical complications and overall maintenance events significantly correlated with overall patient satisfaction score at 1st year. CONCLUSIONS: Mandibular IOD was a beneficial treatment option for seniors with history of deficient CD, improving denture-quality, patient satisfaction, and reducing patient complaints up to 5 years. Maintenance events clustered on 1st year, showing no significant impact on long-term patient satisfaction and other PROMs.


Subject(s)
Denture, Overlay , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Aged , Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported , Denture Retention , Denture, Complete, Lower , Esthetics, Dental , Humans , Mandible , Patient Satisfaction , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
3.
Clin Oral Implants Res ; 28(8): 966-973, 2017 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27357723

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to determine whether reduced bone mineral density (BMD) is correlated with a higher risk for dental implant therapy in an elderly patient population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-nine patients recruited at the Prince Philip Dental Hospital were provided with 2-implant-supported mandibular overdentures. Skeletal BMD was recorded before the implant therapy. The World Health Organization Osteoporosis Diagnosis Classification (femoral neck score) was utilized to define the osteoporosis status of patients. Periapical radiographs were taken with a special radiographic holder at the time of implant loading (baseline) and at follow-up examinations. The mesial and distal marginal bone levels of each implant were measured. The mean marginal bone loss (mMBL) and greatest marginal bone loss (GBL) of four implant sites at patient level were recorded for data analysis. Clinical examination including plaque score (PI) and bleeding on probing (BOP) was recorded. RESULTS: Of the 79 patients recruited in the study, the survival rate of implant was 98.7%. Sixty-three patients (79.7%) were finally available for data collection and statistical analyses. The mean follow-up time was 62.9 (SD = 15.2) months with the mean MBL 0.65 mm (SD = 0.67) and mean GBL 1.25 mm (SD = 0.83), respectively. The average BOP and PI of patients were 49.6% (SD = 30.8) and 47.4% (SD = 37.4). Only BOP was found significantly correlated with mMBL (r = 0.321, P = 0.01). Skeletal BMD was not associated with marginal bone loss (mean MBL: r = -0.094, P = 0.466; mean GBL: r = 0.04, P = 0.761). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, osteoporosis was not a contraindication for implant therapy, and reduced skeletal BMD was not associated with increased marginal bone loss around implants or other complications in an elderly population.


Subject(s)
Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported , Denture, Overlay , Mandible/pathology , Osteoporosis/pathology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Alveolar Bone Loss/pathology , Bone Density , Dental Implantation, Endosseous/methods , Dental Restoration Failure , Female , Humans , Male , Osteoporosis/surgery , Prospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...