Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction

Objective: To compare the patients' satisfaction between patients treated with single tooth implant (STI) or resin bonded bridge (RBB) for single missing tooth replacement. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). Patients treated...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:European Journal of General Dentistry
Main Author: Lim T.; Ariff T.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2020
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85085366889&doi=10.4103%2fejgd.ejgd_63_20&partnerID=40&md5=1ba4419e6de8154a66f5b889f99ccfde
id 2-s2.0-85085366889
spelling 2-s2.0-85085366889
Lim T.; Ariff T.
Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
2020
European Journal of General Dentistry
9
2
10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_63_20
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85085366889&doi=10.4103%2fejgd.ejgd_63_20&partnerID=40&md5=1ba4419e6de8154a66f5b889f99ccfde
Objective: To compare the patients' satisfaction between patients treated with single tooth implant (STI) or resin bonded bridge (RBB) for single missing tooth replacement. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). Patients treated using STI (n=26) and RBB (n=26) were prospectively recruited. A validated patient satisfaction questionnaire was given to the participants to assess the aesthetics, masticatory function, phonetics, ease of cleaning and cost satisfaction using 7-point Likert scale. Demographic data (gender and age) and treatment data (site of treatment) were also collected. Differences in various aspects of satisfaction were compared. Results: STI and RBB groups has similar demographic and treatment characteristics. Both groups revealed high satisfaction with most of the aspects in the questionnaire. There was no statistically significant difference in overall satisfaction between the two treatment groups (p= 0.189). However, STI group had a significant higher score in existing appearance (p= 0.010), mastication (p= 0.018) and phonetics (p= 0.029) compared with RBB. Level of satisfaction did not differ by gender, age and site of the prostheses (p>0.05). Almost all of the participants would choose to undergo the same treatment again in UiTM (STI = 96.2%, RBB = 92.3%). Conclusion: Both STI and RBB participants were highly satisfied with the aesthetics, phonetics, cost and found that the treatment fees were justified and reasonable in UiTM. Therefore, both treatment options are good to be indicated for single missing tooth replacement. © 2020 European Journal of General Dentistry | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
22789626
English
Article

author Lim T.; Ariff T.
spellingShingle Lim T.; Ariff T.
Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
author_facet Lim T.; Ariff T.
author_sort Lim T.; Ariff T.
title Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
title_short Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
title_full Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
title_fullStr Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
title_full_unstemmed Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
title_sort Single tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
publishDate 2020
container_title European Journal of General Dentistry
container_volume 9
container_issue 2
doi_str_mv 10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_63_20
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85085366889&doi=10.4103%2fejgd.ejgd_63_20&partnerID=40&md5=1ba4419e6de8154a66f5b889f99ccfde
description Objective: To compare the patients' satisfaction between patients treated with single tooth implant (STI) or resin bonded bridge (RBB) for single missing tooth replacement. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM). Patients treated using STI (n=26) and RBB (n=26) were prospectively recruited. A validated patient satisfaction questionnaire was given to the participants to assess the aesthetics, masticatory function, phonetics, ease of cleaning and cost satisfaction using 7-point Likert scale. Demographic data (gender and age) and treatment data (site of treatment) were also collected. Differences in various aspects of satisfaction were compared. Results: STI and RBB groups has similar demographic and treatment characteristics. Both groups revealed high satisfaction with most of the aspects in the questionnaire. There was no statistically significant difference in overall satisfaction between the two treatment groups (p= 0.189). However, STI group had a significant higher score in existing appearance (p= 0.010), mastication (p= 0.018) and phonetics (p= 0.029) compared with RBB. Level of satisfaction did not differ by gender, age and site of the prostheses (p>0.05). Almost all of the participants would choose to undergo the same treatment again in UiTM (STI = 96.2%, RBB = 92.3%). Conclusion: Both STI and RBB participants were highly satisfied with the aesthetics, phonetics, cost and found that the treatment fees were justified and reasonable in UiTM. Therefore, both treatment options are good to be indicated for single missing tooth replacement. © 2020 European Journal of General Dentistry | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
issn 22789626
language English
format Article
accesstype
record_format scopus
collection Scopus
_version_ 1809677898392535040