caa a22 4500 606179712 CHVBK 20210128100802.0 cr unu---uuuuu 210128e20150401xx s 000 0 eng 10.1007/s11136-014-0817-2 doi (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s11136-014-0817-2 Influence of different prosthodontic rehabilitation options on oral health-related quality of life, orofacial esthetics and chewing function based on patient-reported outcomes [Elektronische Daten] [Sanja Peršić, Asja Čelebić] Purpose: The aim was to assess influence of different prosthodontic rehabilitation options on improvement of orofacial esthetics, chewing function (CF) and oral health-related quality of life. Methods: Patients treated with 70 conventional complete dentures (CDs), 38 implant-supported mandibular complete dentures opposed to maxillary CDs, 56 conventional removable partial dentures, 15 implant-supported removable partial dentures, 25 conventional fixed partial dentures (FPDs) and 59 implant-supported fixed partial dentures (IFPDs) were included. The survey was conducted using the three questionnaires: the OHIP-CRO14, the Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES-CRO) and the Chewing Function Questionnaire (CFQ), and administrated twice: at the baseline prior the therapy and 3months after prosthodontic rehabilitation had been finished. Results: The after-treatment scores were significantly better than the baseline scores (p<0.001) for the OES, OHIP14 and CF questionnaires in all types of treatments. The two-factor ANOVA showed no significant difference for the OES after-treatment scores between different rehabilitation options and implant presence, but the OHIP14 and CFQ after-treatment scores were significantly better in FPD and IFPDs than in removable implant and conventional denture wearers. The score change was significantly higher in all implant removable denture patients for the OES, OHIP and CFQ. The lowest score change was registered in the FPD wearers. (p<0.01). Conclusions: Removable denture implant patients most benefited from implant support, but IFPD and FPD had the best after-treatment scores. The assessed clinical parameters may help dentists in choice of the best rehabilitation option with the highest treatment effect. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2014 OHRQoL nationallicence Orofacial esthetic scale nationallicence Chewing function questionnaire nationallicence Prosthodontic therapy nationallicence Dental implant support nationallicence Patients outcome nationallicence Peršić Sanja Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Gunduliceva 5, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia aut Čelebić Asja Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine and Clinical Hospital Centre Zagreb, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia aut Quality of Life Research Springer International Publishing 24/4(2015-04-01), 919-926 0962-9343 24:4<919 2015 24 11136 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0817-2 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 Metadata rights reserved Springer special CC-BY-NC licence nationallicence 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-springer NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0817-2 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 700 1- Peršić Sanja Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Gunduliceva 5, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia aut NATIONALLICENCE 700 1- Čelebić Asja Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine and Clinical Hospital Centre Zagreb, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia aut NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Quality of Life Research Springer International Publishing 24/4(2015-04-01), 919-926 0962-9343 24:4<919 2015 24 11136