Satisfaction Level among Patients Treated with Fixed Dental Prosthesis in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study

Abstract

Introduction: Dental treatment aims at correction of existing disease; prevention of future diseasewith rehabilitation of patient’s lost functional capacity and aesthetics. Fixed dental prosthesis is anyprosthesis that is cemented to a natural tooth or dental implants abutments that cannot be removedby patient. The success of prosthodontic treatment is related to prosthesis survival, with its ability tofulfil biologic and patient-evaluated objectives with patient satisfaction. This study is aimed to findthe patient satisfaction with fixed prosthodontic treatment.
 Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was done in a tertiary care hospital among 102patients rehabilitated with fixed dental prosthesis from August to September 2019 after takingethical approval from Institutional Review Committee of Kathmandu Medical College. (IRC No.1207201918). Convenience sampling was done. The questionnaire assessed patient’s satisfaction offixed prosthesis on the basis of appearance, chewing ability, cleansibility, speech and awarenessof oral hygiene measures for cleaning of the prosthesis. Data entry was done in Microsoft exceland analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)version 20.0, point estimate at 95%Confidence Interval was calculated along with frequency and proportion for binary data.
 Results: The majority of the patients 87 (85.3%) were satisfied with their fixed prosthesis, at 95%confidence interval (93.5- 81%). Eighty one (79.4%) were satisfied with their chewing ability; 99(97.1%) satisfied with their speech, 78 (76.4%) satisfied with appearance of fixed prosthesis. Ninetyeight patients (96.1%) were aware of oral hygiene measures, out of which only 66 (67.3%) usedinterdental aids for cleaning of their fixed prosthesis.
 Conclusions: Several factors (chewing ability, appearance, speech, cleansibility of fixed prosthesis)had positive impact on overall satisfaction in majority of the patients. Dentists should continue toemphasise on the significance of maintaining good oral hygiene and use of interdental aids for thelongevity of fixed prosthesis.

Periodontal Behavior and Patient Satisfaction of Anterior Teeth Restored with Single Zirconia Crowns Using a Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique: A 6-Year Prospective Clinical Study

“…Another documented variable in the present study is patient satisfaction, which is crucial for evaluating the quality of treatment and clinical results from a subjective point of view [48]. There are many studies affirming that the success of a prosthetic treatment is related to survival, its biocompatibility, and, finally, to patient satisfaction [44,49].…”

Free-hand Versus Fully guided Monoblock Implant Placement In Full Mouth Rehabilitation Of Edentulous Maxillary Arches: A One-Year Clinical Study

“…The patient satisfaction records in both groups throughout the clinical trial demonstrated how the proper placement & distribution of the implants would affect the quality of the obtained prosthesis, whatever the placement technique utilized in the construction of the progressively loaded prosthesis. [37,38] Regarding Prosthetic Fitness as well as Prosthesis comfort (in terms of stability during rest and function without any patient discomfort), it was revealed that both were insignificantly decreased over time in both groups, and this could be attributed to the continuous stabilization process of the tissues underneath the prostheses over time. On the contrary, the prosthetic maintenance was insignificantly increased in both groups over time, due to increased patients' awareness regarding oral hygiene measures thorough out the investigation period.…”

Satisfação dos pacientes com o atendimento odontológico

“…Quanto ao ano de publicação, os anos de 2019 6,8,11,16,21-27 e 2018 [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] tiveram o maior número de artigos, onze em cada ano; seguidos de 2015 com sete artigos publicados 14,[39][40][41][42][43][44] , 2020 com cinco [45][46][47][48][49] , 2017 com quatro 1-52 , 2010 [53][54][55] , 2012 [56][57][58] , 2014 2,59,60 e 2016 15,61,62 com três artigos cada; 2005 63,64 , 2011 65,66 e 2013 7,67 com dois artigos cada ano, e 2008 12 com apenas um artigo publicado.…”