File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

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

TitleSingle tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction
Authors
KeywordsPatient's satisfaction
resin-bonded bridge
single tooth implant
Issue Date2020
Citation
European Journal of General Dentistry, 2020, v. 9, n. 2, p. 90-95 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective: 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.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/309527
ISSN
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.187

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLim, Tong Wah-
dc.contributor.authorTengku Mohd Ariff, Tengku Fazrina-
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-29T07:02:38Z-
dc.date.available2021-12-29T07:02:38Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Journal of General Dentistry, 2020, v. 9, n. 2, p. 90-95-
dc.identifier.issn2278-9626-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/309527-
dc.description.abstractObjective: 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.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of General Dentistry-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectPatient's satisfaction-
dc.subjectresin-bonded bridge-
dc.subjectsingle tooth implant-
dc.titleSingle tooth implant versus resin-bonded bridge: A study of patient's satisfaction-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_63_20-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85085366889-
dc.identifier.volume9-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage90-
dc.identifier.epage95-
dc.identifier.eissn2320-4753-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats