Prosthodontic treatment can improve the ingestible food profile in Japanese adult outpatients.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of prosthodontic treatment on the ingestible food profile in adult Japanese outpatients, and to identify the related risk factors that can deteriorate the profile. METHODS: The participants were 277 outpatients who visited university-based specialty clinics in Japan for prosthodontic treatment. The demographic data, number of present teeth assessed via intraoral examination, and oral health-related quality of life assessed by the total Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-J54) scores of all participants were recorded before treatment. Ingestible food profile score (IFS) was recorded using a validated food intake questionnaire. Eligible participants who answered the questionnaire before and after treatment were categorized into five groups based on the prosthodontic treatments they received (i.e., crowns, bridges, removable partial dentures, removable complete dentures, and removable complete and partial dentures). RESULTS: Multivariate analysis of covariance revealed a statistically significant main effect of prosthodontic intervention (time course: before and after treatment) on mean IFS (P=0.035, F=4.526), even after adjusting for covariates (age, number of present teeth, and treatment modality). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that the low number of present teeth (r=0.427, P<0.001) and a high OHIP-J54 total score (r=-0.519, P<0.001) of the patients at the baseline were significantly associated with their baseline IFSs, even after adjusting for confounding variables. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this multicenter follow-up study indicate the importance of prosthodontic rehabilitation in improving patients' ingestible food profiles.

A multi-centered epidemiological study evaluating the validity of the treatment difficulty indices developed by the Japan Prosthodontic Society.

PURPOSE: The Japan Prosthodontic Society developed a multi-axis assessment protocol to evaluate the complex variations in patients who need prosthodontic care, and to classify the level of treatment difficulty. A previous report found the protocol to be sufficiently reliable. The purpose of this multi-center cohort study was to evaluate the validity of this multi-axis assessment protocol. METHODS: The treatment difficulty was evaluated using the multi-axis assessment protocol before starting prosthodontic treatment. The time required for active prosthodontic treatment, medical resources such as treatment cost, and changes in the oral health-related QOL before and after treatment, were evaluated after treatment completion. The construct validity of this protocol was assessed by the correlation between the dentist's pre-operative subjective assessment of the treatment difficulty, and the level of difficulty determined by this protocol. The predictive validity was assessed estimating the correlations between a "comprehensive level of treatment difficulty" based on the four axes of this protocol and total treatment cost, total treatment time, and changes in the oral health-related QOL before and after treatment. RESULTS: The construct validity of this protocol was well documented except for psychological assessment. Regarding the predictive validity, the comprehensive level of treatment difficulty assessed before treatment was significantly correlated with the three surrogate endpoints known to be related to the treatment difficulty (total treatment cost, treatment time, and improvement in the oral health-related QOL). To further clarify the validity of the protocol according to patients' oral condition, a subgroup analysis by defects was performed. Analyses revealed that treatment difficulty assessment before treatment was significantly related to one or two surrogate endpoints in the fully edentulous patients and the partially edentulous patients. No significant relationship was observed in the patients with mixture of full/partial edentulism and the patients with teeth problems, possibly due to the small sample size in these groups. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that the multi-axis assessment protocol was sufficiently valid to predict the level of treatment difficulty in prosthodontic care in patients with fully edentulous defects and with partially edentulous defects.

A multi-centered epidemiological study evaluating the reliability of the treatment difficulty indices developed by the Japan Prosthodontic Society.

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic assessment of the level of difficulty in treating patients who need prosthodontic care is useful to establish a medico-economically efficient system with primary care dentists and prosthodontic specialists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-axis assessment protocol was established using the newly established treatment difficulty indices. The protocol contains Axis I: oral physiological conditions (e.g., teeth damage and/or missing teeth); Axis II: general health and sociological conditions (e.g., medical disorders); Axis III: oral health-related quality of life (OHRQOL; e.g., oral health impact profile: OHIP); and Axis IV: psychological health (e.g., mood, anxiety, somatoform disorders). A preliminary study on the test-retest consistency of the protocol was conducted to check the levels of reliability of the indices prior to a large-scale, multi-center cohort study on the validity of the protocol. RESULTS: The test-retest consistency in terms of the oral physiological condition (Axis I) after data reduction was 0.82 [corrected] for patients with teeth problems, 0.73 [corrected] for partially edentulous patients, and 0.78 [corrected] for edentulous patients. The reliability for general health and sociological conditions (Axis II), OHRQOL (Axis III), and psychological health (Axis IV) were 0.88, 0.74, and 0.61, respectively. These values reflect either "sufficient agreement" or "excellent agreement" in accordance with the criteria established by Landis and Koch (1977) [1]. CONCLUSION: This protocol is the first multi-axis assessment scheme introduced for prosthodontic treatment with sufficient reliability. This new system is therefore expected to have a significant impact on future dental diagnostic nomenclature systems.