Dec 15, 2011 - Goal: To measure change in a quality of life after treatment with removable dentures and to ... 35 who came to repair their broken dentures.
Quality of Life with Removable Dentures
MSM, 2011; 23(4): 214-220
Susan Reisine was the first researcher in the field of social dimen doi: 10.5455/msm.2011.23.214-220
Recieved: 10 December | Accepted: 15 December problems. Reisine compared the work 2011 day’s loss as a 2011 consequence © AVICENA 2011
conditions and concluded that implications of dental problems can be as impacts of some other diseases (1). Later, during late eighties and
Quality of Life with Removable Dentures number of indices were developed for assessing social dimensions of d
OHIP (Oral Health Impact Profile) is a commonly used questionnaire fo
Amra Hadzipasic-Nazdrajic Public Institution Health Center of Sarajevo Canton, HealthRelated Center “Dom zdravlja Stari Grad” Health Quality of Life (OHRQoL).
OHIP consists of 49 questions, divided into seven constitutive dom
Original paper limitations (nine questions), physical pain/discomfort (nine questions SUMMARY Goal: To measure change in a quality of life after treatment with removable dentures and to describe differences in quality of life in patients with discomfort (five questions), physical disability (nine questions), psycho new and worn out dentures. Materials and methods: Measuring instrument was OHIP-49, translated from English into one of the languages in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Sample consisted of patients who wanted make/replace mobile or came(five to repair a broken dentures. (six toquestions), socialdentures disability questions) andComprehenhandicap (six questi sibility of the OHIP-BH49 was tested on a sub-sample of patients. Three measurements were made: before and after the insertion of dentu res and when patients came to repair their mobile dentures. Results: Sample consisted of 67 patients: 32 patients who sought prosthetic treatment, and 35 who came to repair their broken dentures. We received 89.7% correctly filled questionnaires. Minor changes were made in four (4) questions. 1.1. Development of OHIP Statistical analysis performed with the T-test revealed the significant differences, before and after the treatment with mobile dentures (t=39.5, p5 18 12,67 2,249 1,490 0,243 square = 5:48, p = 0065: p> 0.05). no dentures 5 12,00 1,414 9 N
Psychological discomfort(5)
5 no dentures
7 18
7,86 11,00
2,610 3,068
5
12,60
0,548
5,038
0,014 SIGN.
4.7. Statistical analysis performed with the T-test for patients’1,902 age 5 18 12,11 3,724 0,059 no dentures 5 12,40 1,817 Before and after receiving new older years had higher total 5 18 15,00 OHIP and higher values in majority of domains. In our third2,425 measurement, patients no dentures 5 17,00 0,707 younger than 50 had higher total values domains. 5 18 10,06 in two 1,955 SIGN. no dentures 5 12,80 0,447 measurement and in one domain in our second measurement. In third measurement there 5 Older patients 18 1,685 were no significant differences. had12,61 poorer QoL in all domains with SIGN. no dentures 5 15,80 1,483
significant differences.
We had no significant differences for total OHIP, Table 5. Table 4. ANOVA test of differences in OHIP values among patients who wore dentures 5 Multiple comparison of differences in OHIP values between patients younger/older than 50 years using T-test lessTable than 5 years, longer than 5 years and who had no dentures before receiving one.
4.6. BEFORE TH OHIP
Statisticalless analysis with than 50 performed years old 51 and the moreChi-square t-testtest for time of N
14 14 14 14 14 14 14
Mean SD 91,43 18,00 13,14 9,29 11,64 16,79 9,71 12,86
6,618 3,351 2,598 3,429 3,079 2,119 1,729 2,143
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14
23,71 3,79 7,71 2,36 5,00 1,07 2,07 1,71
5,876 2,045 1,978 1,447 1,664 0,829 0,997 0,914
16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
27,44 3,19 8,63 2,19 7,44 1,44 2,19 2,38
4,427 1,642 1,928 2,198 1,548 1,459 1,276 1,147
11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
99,45 20,45 17,55 9,00 15,82 14,36 9,09 13,18
8,513 2,296 2,115 1,732 4,119 1,748 1,375 1,079
19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19
99,42 20,58 17,16 10,47 14,16 16,05 8,58 12,42
6,826 ,011 2,244 -,144 3,078 ,369 2,065 -1,992 2,713 1,334 2,460 -1,997 1,865 ,792 2,501 ,953
wearing dentures 14
Functional limitation (9)
Physical discomfort (9) Psychological discomfort (5)
Physical disability (9) Psychological disability (6) Social disability (6) Handicap (6) AFTER TH OHIP
Functional limitation (9) Physical discomfort (9) Psychological discomfort (5)
Physical disability (9) Psychological disability (6) Social disability (6) Handicap (6) WORN DENTURES OHIP
Functional limitation (9) Physical discomfort (9) Psychological discomfort (5)
Physical disability (9) Psychological disability (6) Social disability (6) Handicap (6)
N
Mean SD 94,69 6,906 17,50 2,221 12,63 1,746 11,63 2,363 12,81 3,038 15,06 2,516 11,25 2,049 13,81 2,073
t (df=28) P
-1,318 0,474 0,648 -2,199 -1,046 2,012 -2,2 -1,24
0,199 0,630 0,522 0,036 significant 0,305 0,054 0,036 significant 0,225
-1,938 ,875 -1,275 ,246 -4,155 -,828 -,275 -1,727
,058 ,382 ,213 ,808
