The patients' satisfaction following implant treatment.
10.4047/jkap.2008.46.6.569
- Author:
Yoon Young HEO
1
;
Seong Joo HEO
;
Myung Woo CHANG
;
Ji Man PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Chemistry, Wellesley College, USA.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Dental implant;
Patient satisfaction;
Questionnaire;
Likert scale;
Internal consistency;
Factor analysis
- MeSH:
Dental Implants;
Esthetics;
Factor Analysis, Statistical;
Health Care Costs;
Humans;
Mastication;
Patient Satisfaction;
Prostheses and Implants;
Surveys and Questionnaires;
Weights and Measures
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2008;46(6):569-576
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: While patient-centered outcomes are usually not reported, these may represent major aspects of the implant success for the patient. Use of a well-designed patient survey form can be an invaluable asset to the implant practitioners. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate patient satisfaction after implant therapy by means of a questionnaire. MATERIAL AND METHODS: South Korean patients (n = 100), who visited the dental examination center of Soon Chun Hyang university hospital, were asked to fill out the satisfaction questionnaire regarding aspects of cost, comfort, esthetics, chewing, gingival health, food impaction, phonetic aspect, screw loosening, and general satisfaction. Responses to statements were given on the Likert response scale. Four experimental groups of patients were distinguished with various location (A1, A2, A3), year (B1, B2, B3), number of implant replacements (C1, C2, C3), and treatment cost (D1, D2, D3). The reliability of the response scales was measured by calculation of its internal consistency, expressed as Cronbach's alpha. The scales were distinguished by means of factor analysis method. Possible differences in scale scores among the groups were assessed by One-way ANOVA (alpha = 0.05). RESULTS: Patients responded to most of the statements with high satisfaction. But the mean scale score of statement about cost was low. After the verification of internal consistency and factor analysis, five components, e.g. general satisfaction, comfort, chewing efficiency, esthetics, and phonetic aspect were grouped together. These components could be explained with common meaning and the first factor was named as 'general satisfaction' . Differences in patient satisfaction on the scale with esthetics were present between patients who have been wearing the implant prosthesis less than three years and those more than seven years (B1 < B3). CONCLUSION: The patients were generally satisfied with the outcome of implant treatment. But the patients' major complaint was high cost and while the statistically significant difference was not shown, the satisfaction scale about food impaction and esthetics was low. So the continuing efforts to make improvements about these problems are needed for the implant practitioners.
