Abstract:Purposes: This aim of this cross-sectional study was to investigate the factors associated with patient satisfaction in patients with a dental implant-supported single crown or fixed prosthesis.Materials and methods: One hundred and ninety-six patients with dental implants functioning more than 1 year were provided with a 13-question questionnaire to report their satisfaction regarding the functional aspects, aesthetic outcome, cleansing ability, general satisfaction, treatment cost, and overall satisfaction. … Show more
“…The subjective preference and user satisfaction found in this study suggest that the alignment between the FFA and the optical centre of the PALs could be a key factor in facilitating PAL adaptation, and other parameters, such as inset, lens design or lens corridor, could play a less relevant role in user satisfaction. Patients’ satisfaction is usually measured with VAS scale 35 in vision and other health research, classifying as satisfied patients with a score higher than 5 36 , 37 and highly satisfied patients with a score higher than 8 over 10 36 , 38 . However, there is not an accepted VAS score to classify subjects’ satisfaction.…”
Progressive addition lens (PAL) prescription is usually conducted using the pupillary centre as a reference, which in general does not coincide with the visual axis (kappa distance), and this difference could induce undesired prismatic effects in far and near vision distances and adaptation problems. This study aimed to assess the impact on subjects’ visual satisfaction with PALs prescribed based on foveal fixation axis (FFA) measurements. Two different PALs (LifeStyle 3i, Hoya Lens Iberia) were randomly prescribed [one with a customized inset (the difference between the FFA measurements (Ergofocus®, Lentitech, Spain) at far and near distances and the second with a standard inset (2.5 mm)] to be used by 71 healthy presbyopic volunteers in a prospective double-masked crossover clinical study involving one month of use of each PAL. Patients were self-classified into four groups according to their previous experience with PALs: neophyte, PAL users, PAL drop-out, and uncomfortable PAL users. Visual function and overall satisfaction with each PAL were collected and compared. Ninety-seven percent (95% CI 93–100%) of participants successfully adapted to PALs prescribed with FFA without significant differences (P = 0.26) among the study groups (100% neophyte and uncomfortable PAL users (95% CI 100% in both groups), 89% (95% CI 67–100%) PAL users and 94% (95% CI 82–100%) PAL drop-out group). There were no statistically significant differences in visual function (P > 0.05) between customized and standard inset PALs. Customized and standard inset lenses showed similar satisfaction (P > 0.42) that increased significantly (P < 0.01 without any carry-over effect) after 30 days of wear. PALs prescribed with FFA measurements showed high visual satisfaction, suggesting that these measurements are suitable for prescribing PAL adaptation processes. Additional research is necessary to assess differences in PAL users’ performance with different prescription methods and lens designs.
“…The subjective preference and user satisfaction found in this study suggest that the alignment between the FFA and the optical centre of the PALs could be a key factor in facilitating PAL adaptation, and other parameters, such as inset, lens design or lens corridor, could play a less relevant role in user satisfaction. Patients’ satisfaction is usually measured with VAS scale 35 in vision and other health research, classifying as satisfied patients with a score higher than 5 36 , 37 and highly satisfied patients with a score higher than 8 over 10 36 , 38 . However, there is not an accepted VAS score to classify subjects’ satisfaction.…”
Progressive addition lens (PAL) prescription is usually conducted using the pupillary centre as a reference, which in general does not coincide with the visual axis (kappa distance), and this difference could induce undesired prismatic effects in far and near vision distances and adaptation problems. This study aimed to assess the impact on subjects’ visual satisfaction with PALs prescribed based on foveal fixation axis (FFA) measurements. Two different PALs (LifeStyle 3i, Hoya Lens Iberia) were randomly prescribed [one with a customized inset (the difference between the FFA measurements (Ergofocus®, Lentitech, Spain) at far and near distances and the second with a standard inset (2.5 mm)] to be used by 71 healthy presbyopic volunteers in a prospective double-masked crossover clinical study involving one month of use of each PAL. Patients were self-classified into four groups according to their previous experience with PALs: neophyte, PAL users, PAL drop-out, and uncomfortable PAL users. Visual function and overall satisfaction with each PAL were collected and compared. Ninety-seven percent (95% CI 93–100%) of participants successfully adapted to PALs prescribed with FFA without significant differences (P = 0.26) among the study groups (100% neophyte and uncomfortable PAL users (95% CI 100% in both groups), 89% (95% CI 67–100%) PAL users and 94% (95% CI 82–100%) PAL drop-out group). There were no statistically significant differences in visual function (P > 0.05) between customized and standard inset PALs. Customized and standard inset lenses showed similar satisfaction (P > 0.42) that increased significantly (P < 0.01 without any carry-over effect) after 30 days of wear. PALs prescribed with FFA measurements showed high visual satisfaction, suggesting that these measurements are suitable for prescribing PAL adaptation processes. Additional research is necessary to assess differences in PAL users’ performance with different prescription methods and lens designs.
Background: Highly prevalent tooth loss is observed among populations around the world. To restore masticatory function and satisfactory aesthetics, missing teeth must be replaced. Dental implants are increasingly used for this purpose. This study aimed to assess periodontal patients’ knowledge and attitudes towards dental implants. Methods: 467 anonymous questionnaires of periodontal patients were analyzed. The population participants were divided according to gender, age, education and place of residence. In the statistical analysis, the chi-squared test of independence was used (p < 0.05). The main questions addressed patients’ knowledge about dental implants and the factors influencing their decision to undergo implantation. Results: The majority of periodontal patients were aware of dental implants and the importance of oral hygiene in their maintenance. However, the population studied had many knowledge deficits, especially on the technical and biological aspects of implants. The lack of knowledge about peri-implantitis was surprising in the group seeking professional periodontal care. Patients obtained information mainly from the internet and from family and friends, with their dentists being the third source. Good functional and aesthetic outcomes would encourage them to undergo the implantation procedure, and high cost and the possibility of complications were the most discouraging factors. Conclusions: Given the growing popularity of implant treatment, patients should be provided with evidence-based knowledge about indications and possible contraindications to implants to make informed decisions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.