Oral health-related quality of life in partially edentulous patients treated with removable, fixed, fixed-removable, and implant-supported prostheses.

PURPOSE: This study investigated changes in oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in partially edentulous patients treated with removable dental prostheses (RDPs), fixed dental prostheses (FDPs), fixed-removable (combined) restorations (COMBs), and implant-supported fixed prostheses (ISFPs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 200 patients (30 to 50 years old) were enrolled: 45 received RDPs, 32 received FDPs, 66 received COMBs, and 57 received ISFPs. OHRQoL was measured using the shortened version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) before treatment and 6 weeks and 6 months after treatment. Treatment groups were sex-neutral; however, significant differences were found relative to age and Kennedy classification. A general linear model was used to explore the interaction of age and Kennedy classification with treatment modality. RESULTS: Pretreatment analysis revealed that the psychologic discomfort domain showed the greatest negative impact on OHRQoL, while functional limitation had the smallest effect. Within-group comparison revealed a significant decrease in OHIP scores throughout the study in all groups except the younger age group treated with RDPs after 6 weeks. Between-group comparison revealed significant differences among the treatment groups. The least amount of OHRQoL improvement was recorded for RDPs for both age groups at 6 weeks and for the younger age group at 6 months. There were no significant differences between FDPs and ISFPs. CONCLUSIONS: All treatments produced significant improvement in OHRQoL. The least amount of improvement was observed in patients with RDPs. OHRQoL changes in patients treated with FDPs and ISFPs were comparable. The same treatment can have different impacts on the OHRQoL of partially edentulous individuals depending on their age and Kennedy classification.

Oral health care and dental treatment needs in the Barents region.

OBJECTIVES: The first aim was to study how oral health care delivery was organized in member countries and to determine whether there were differences across the Barents region. The second aim was to assess the performance of the care provision systems. The Barents region is one of the largest hinterlands in northern Europe. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptions of the oral health care provision systems in Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia were written. Performance of the care provision systems was assessed by evaluating access to and use of services in relation to oral health. METHODS: National statistics, governmental reports and scientific publications were used as data sources. Data were supplemented by sending questioning to national and local managers and experts. Inter- and intra-country comparisons included dental health status, service availability and restrictions, financial support for oral health care, availability of dental personnel and use of services. RESULTS: In the Barents region, oral health care provision systems, mainly operating via the public sector, were in place in all countries. However, in most countries, oral health was poorer, access to care more difficult and use of services lower, mainly because of a lack of dental personnel and economic constraints. Overall, there was a huge difference in the inhabitants to dentist ratios between the Nordic countries and Russia. CONCLUSIONS: Professional co-operation within dentistry should be integral to the Barents region in order to expand the number of dental personnel, improve oral health and increase access to dental care.