The effect of implant prosthesis complications on patient satisfaction.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: How complications regarding implant prostheses affect patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare patient satisfaction with implant restorations in patients with or without a history of complications. These data were used to determine whether implant prosthesis complications affected self-reported OHRQoL. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were gathered from 176 edentulous and partially dentate patients who had received implant prostheses consisting of implant-supported crowns, implant-supported overdentures, and screw-retained fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) in predoctoral and postdoctoral clinics between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2014. Demographics and complications were self-reported by means of a survey. Patients rated their OHRQoL using the Quality of Life with Implant-Prostheses (QoLIP-10) questionnaire. Means were compared by using a 1-way ANOVA to compare the variables of prosthesis complications, sociodemographic data, and patient satisfaction. Significantly different variables were further evaluated using a post hoc Tukey-Kramer Honestly Significant Different (HSD) test (α=.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in patient satisfaction were found related to prosthesis complications, gender, and marital status. The most common complication for implant-supported crowns was screw loosening. For implant-supported overdentures and screw-retained FDPs, the most common complication was repair of the prosthesis. Those who had experienced complications reported lower OHRQoL scores than those who had not. Women and widows/widowers overall reported lower OHRQoL scores. The OHRQoL scores of women with and without prosthesis complications were not statistically different (P=.073). No significant differences were found relative to age (P=.937) or education (P=.302). Patients without complications with implant-supported crowns reported the lowest satisfaction because of oral hygiene difficulties. The lowest satisfaction in patients with complications of implant-supported overdentures and screw-retained FDPs was related to worry/concern because of problems with the implant prosthesis. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey suggest that patients who experience complications with an implant prosthesis report a lower OHRQoL score than those who do not. Future studies are needed to evaluate patient satisfaction by comparing prosthesis complications with and without implants to determine whether patients who have had complications with implant prostheses are more satisfied than those who have experienced complications with conventional prostheses.

Assessment of occlusion curriculum in predoctoral dental education: report from ACP Task Force on Occlusion Education.

PURPOSE: The purposes of this report were to (1) assess the current occlusion curriculum in the predoctoral prosthodontic education of US dental institutions and (2) to examine the opinions of faculty, course directors, and program directors on the contents of occlusion curriculum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Task Force on Occlusion Education from the American College of Prosthodontists (ACP) conducted two surveys using a web-based survey engine: one to assess the current status of occlusion education in predoctoral dental education and another to examine the opinions of faculty and course directors on the content of occlusion curriculum. The sections in the surveys included demographic information, general curriculum information, occlusion curriculum for dentate patients, occlusion curriculum for removable prosthodontics, occlusion curriculum for implant prosthodontics, temporomandibular disorder (TMD) curriculum, teaching philosophy, concepts taught, and methods of assessment. The results from the surveys were compiled and analyzed using descriptive statistics. The results from the two surveys on general concepts taught in occlusion curriculum were sorted and compared for discrepancies. RESULTS: According to the predoctoral occlusion curriculum surveys, canine guidance was preferred for dentate patients, fixed prosthodontics, and fixed implant prosthodontics. Bilateral balanced occlusion was preferred for removable prosthodontics and removable implant prosthodontics. There were minor differences between the two surveys regarding the occlusion concepts being taught and the opinions of faculty members teaching occlusion. CONCLUSION: Two surveys were conducted regarding the current concepts being taught in occlusion curriculum and the opinions of educators on what should be taught in occlusion curriculum. An updated and clearly defined curriculum guideline addressing occlusion in fixed prosthodontics, removable prosthodontics, implant prosthodontics, and TMD is needed.