Factors influencing edentulous patients’ preferences for prosthodontic treatment
Identifieur interne : 001751 ( Istex/Checkpoint ); précédent : 001750; suivant : 001752Factors influencing edentulous patients’ preferences for prosthodontic treatment
Auteurs : C. R. Leles ; N. P. Ferreira ; A. H. Vieira ; A. C. V. Campos [Brésil] ; E. T. SilvaSource :
- Journal of Oral Rehabilitation [ 0305-182X ] ; 2011-05.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Blackwell publishing, Complete dentures, Component factor loadings, Conceptual analysis, Consecutive sample, Conventional dentures, Conventional treatment, Dental care, Dental implants, Denture, Edentulous, Edentulous arches, Edentulous maxilla, Edentulous patient, Edentulous patients, Factor analysis, Factor loadings, Federal university, Fisp, Functional performance, Immediate loading, Implant, Implant dentures, Implant treatment, Important factor, Mandible, Mandibular, Mandibular denture, Mandibular overdentures, Maxilla, Minas gerais, More treatment, Nancial, Nancial concerns, Nancial situation, Overdentures, Patient satisfaction, Preference, Preferred treatment, Preferred treatment option, Present study, Prospective study, Prosthesis, Prosthet dent, Prosthodont, Prosthodontic, Prosthodontic treatment, Psychological factors, Surgery risks, Transitory solution, Treatment choice, Treatment options, Treatment risk, York consensus statement.
- Teeft :
- Blackwell publishing, Complete dentures, Component factor loadings, Conceptual analysis, Consecutive sample, Conventional dentures, Conventional treatment, Dental care, Dental implants, Denture, Edentulous, Edentulous arches, Edentulous maxilla, Edentulous patient, Edentulous patients, Factor analysis, Factor loadings, Federal university, Fisp, Functional performance, Immediate loading, Implant, Implant dentures, Implant treatment, Important factor, Mandible, Mandibular, Mandibular denture, Mandibular overdentures, Maxilla, Minas gerais, More treatment, Nancial, Nancial concerns, Nancial situation, Overdentures, Patient satisfaction, Preference, Preferred treatment, Preferred treatment option, Present study, Prospective study, Prosthesis, Prosthet dent, Prosthodont, Prosthodontic, Prosthodontic treatment, Psychological factors, Surgery risks, Transitory solution, Treatment choice, Treatment options, Treatment risk, York consensus statement.
Abstract
Summary The aim of this study was to identify factors influencing edentulous patients’ preferences for treatment using conventional or implant dentures (ID). A consecutive sample of 112 patients was selected in a university facility. All patients responded to a questionnaire concerning preferences about treatment and factors influencing preferences for conventional complete dentures (CD), implant‐retained overdentures (IRO) and fixed implant‐supported prostheses (FISP). Subsequently, a set of 21 questions was presented, and patients were requested to rate the importance of various potential reasons influencing their choice of treatment. Preference for CD was more prevalent for maxilla (52·7%) and mandible (41·1%). Fixed implant‐supported prostheses and IRO were preferred for the mandible (FISP = 37·5%; IRO = 21·4%) rather than maxilla (FISP = 27·7%; IRO = 19·6%). The most preferred treatment option among the subjects when evaluating both arches was the implant‐supported fixed or removable prosthesis (FISP/IRO). A preference for combined upper and lower CD was also commonly reported (39·3%). Factor analysis identified six components that accounted for 72·2% of the total variance: (i) psychosocial benefits, (ii) functional performance, (iii) technical and financial concerns, (iv) post‐insertion complaints, (v) removability and (vi) longevity. Technical and financial concerns (cost, complexity, surgery risks and duration of treatment) were more relevant for those who preferred ID (P < 0·001). With the exception of post‐insertion complaints, all mean scores of component factor loadings were positive for ID. Conventional complete dentures are associated with lower expected outcomes by patients, and cost‐related issues are the major factors associated with the preferences for implant treatment of edentulous patients.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02158.x
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:1E1B8827E4763E1261F10667F458838C99FB0C9DLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Factors influencing edentulous patients’ preferences for prosthodontic treatment</title><author><name sortKey="Leles, C R" sort="Leles, C R" uniqKey="Leles C" first="C. R." last="Leles">C. R. Leles</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ferreira, N P" sort="Ferreira, N P" uniqKey="Ferreira N" first="N. P." last="Ferreira">N. P. Ferreira</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vieira, A H" sort="Vieira, A H" uniqKey="Vieira A" first="A. H." last="Vieira">A. H. Vieira</name></author><author><name sortKey="Campos, A C V" sort="Campos, A C V" uniqKey="Campos A" first="A. C. V." last="Campos">A. C. V. Campos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Silva, E T" sort="Silva, E T" uniqKey="Silva E" first="E. T." last="Silva">E. T. Silva</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:1E1B8827E4763E1261F10667F458838C99FB0C9D</idno><date when="2011" year="2011">2011</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02158.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/1E1B8827E4763E1261F10667F458838C99FB0C9D/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000F06</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000F06</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">000F06</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">001751</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Checkpoint">001751</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Factors influencing edentulous patients’ preferences for prosthodontic treatment</title><author><name sortKey="Leles, C R" sort="Leles, C R" uniqKey="Leles C" first="C. R." last="Leles">C. R. Leles</name><affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Goias</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Ferreira, N P" sort="Ferreira, N P" uniqKey="Ferreira N" first="N. P." last="Ferreira">N. P. Ferreira</name><affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Goias</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Vieira, A H" sort="Vieira, A H" uniqKey="Vieira A" first="A. H." last="Vieira">A. H. Vieira</name><affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Goias</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Campos, A C V" sort="Campos, A C V" uniqKey="Campos A" first="A. C. V." last="Campos">A. C. V. Campos</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">Brésil</country><wicri:regionArea>School of Dentistry, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais</wicri:regionArea><placeName><region type="state">Minas Gerais</region></placeName></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Silva, E T" sort="Silva, E T" uniqKey="Silva E" first="E. T." last="Silva">E. T. Silva</name><affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Goias</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Oral Rehabilitation</title><title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL ORAL REHABILITATION</title><idno type="ISSN">0305-182X</idno><idno type="eISSN">1365-2842</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">38</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="333">333</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="339">339</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">7</biblScope><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2011-05">2011-05</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0305-182X</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0305-182X</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Blackwell publishing</term><term>Complete dentures</term><term>Component factor loadings</term><term>Conceptual analysis</term><term>Consecutive sample</term><term>Conventional dentures</term><term>Conventional treatment</term><term>Dental care</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Denture</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous arches</term><term>Edentulous maxilla</term><term>Edentulous patient</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Factor analysis</term><term>Factor loadings</term><term>Federal university</term><term>Fisp</term><term>Functional performance</term><term>Immediate loading</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant dentures</term><term>Implant treatment</term><term>Important factor</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Mandibular</term><term>Mandibular denture</term><term>Mandibular overdentures</term><term>Maxilla</term><term>Minas gerais</term><term>More treatment</term><term>Nancial</term><term>Nancial concerns</term><term>Nancial situation</term><term>Overdentures</term><term>Patient satisfaction</term><term>Preference</term><term>Preferred treatment</term><term>Preferred treatment option</term><term>Present study</term><term>Prospective study</term><term>Prosthesis</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthodont</term><term>Prosthodontic</term><term>Prosthodontic treatment</term><term>Psychological factors</term><term>Surgery risks</term><term>Transitory solution</term><term>Treatment choice</term><term>Treatment options</term><term>Treatment risk</term><term>York consensus statement</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Blackwell publishing</term><term>Complete dentures</term><term>Component factor loadings</term><term>Conceptual analysis</term><term>Consecutive sample</term><term>Conventional dentures</term><term>Conventional treatment</term><term>Dental care</term><term>Dental implants</term><term>Denture</term><term>Edentulous</term><term>Edentulous arches</term><term>Edentulous maxilla</term><term>Edentulous patient</term><term>Edentulous patients</term><term>Factor analysis</term><term>Factor loadings</term><term>Federal university</term><term>Fisp</term><term>Functional performance</term><term>Immediate loading</term><term>Implant</term><term>Implant dentures</term><term>Implant treatment</term><term>Important factor</term><term>Mandible</term><term>Mandibular</term><term>Mandibular denture</term><term>Mandibular overdentures</term><term>Maxilla</term><term>Minas gerais</term><term>More treatment</term><term>Nancial</term><term>Nancial concerns</term><term>Nancial situation</term><term>Overdentures</term><term>Patient satisfaction</term><term>Preference</term><term>Preferred treatment</term><term>Preferred treatment option</term><term>Present study</term><term>Prospective study</term><term>Prosthesis</term><term>Prosthet dent</term><term>Prosthodont</term><term>Prosthodontic</term><term>Prosthodontic treatment</term><term>Psychological factors</term><term>Surgery risks</term><term>Transitory solution</term><term>Treatment choice</term><term>Treatment options</term><term>Treatment risk</term><term>York consensus statement</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">Summary The aim of this study was to identify factors influencing edentulous patients’ preferences for treatment using conventional or implant dentures (ID). A consecutive sample of 112 patients was selected in a university facility. All patients responded to a questionnaire concerning preferences about treatment and factors influencing preferences for conventional complete dentures (CD), implant‐retained overdentures (IRO) and fixed implant‐supported prostheses (FISP). Subsequently, a set of 21 questions was presented, and patients were requested to rate the importance of various potential reasons influencing their choice of treatment. Preference for CD was more prevalent for maxilla (52·7%) and mandible (41·1%). Fixed implant‐supported prostheses and IRO were preferred for the mandible (FISP = 37·5%; IRO = 21·4%) rather than maxilla (FISP = 27·7%; IRO = 19·6%). The most preferred treatment option among the subjects when evaluating both arches was the implant‐supported fixed or removable prosthesis (FISP/IRO). A preference for combined upper and lower CD was also commonly reported (39·3%). Factor analysis identified six components that accounted for 72·2% of the total variance: (i) psychosocial benefits, (ii) functional performance, (iii) technical and financial concerns, (iv) post‐insertion complaints, (v) removability and (vi) longevity. Technical and financial concerns (cost, complexity, surgery risks and duration of treatment) were more relevant for those who preferred ID (P < 0·001). With the exception of post‐insertion complaints, all mean scores of component factor loadings were positive for ID. Conventional complete dentures are associated with lower expected outcomes by patients, and cost‐related issues are the major factors associated with the preferences for implant treatment of edentulous patients.</div></front></TEI><affiliations><list><country><li>Brésil</li></country><region><li>Minas Gerais</li></region></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Ferreira, N P" sort="Ferreira, N P" uniqKey="Ferreira N" first="N. P." last="Ferreira">N. P. Ferreira</name><name sortKey="Leles, C R" sort="Leles, C R" uniqKey="Leles C" first="C. R." last="Leles">C. R. Leles</name><name sortKey="Silva, E T" sort="Silva, E T" uniqKey="Silva E" first="E. T." last="Silva">E. T. Silva</name><name sortKey="Vieira, A H" sort="Vieira, A H" uniqKey="Vieira A" first="A. H." last="Vieira">A. H. Vieira</name></noCountry><country name="Brésil"><region name="Minas Gerais"><name sortKey="Campos, A C V" sort="Campos, A C V" uniqKey="Campos A" first="A. C. V." last="Campos">A. C. V. Campos</name></region></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Checkpoint
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001751 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd -nk 001751 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Checkpoint
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:1E1B8827E4763E1261F10667F458838C99FB0C9D
|texte= Factors influencing edentulous patients’ preferences for prosthodontic treatment
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |