Journal
Longitudinal Study: Patient-Reported Outcomes in Zirconia vs. PFM for Full Mouth Rehabilitation, 2 Years Follow up
Abstract
Abstract
Objective: This longitudinal study aims to explore patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction levels among adults undergoing full mouth rehabilitation with zirconia and porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) restorations.
Methods: A total of 60 adult participants requiring comprehensive dental rehabilitation will be recruited and randomly assigned to two groups: one receiving zirconia restorations and the other receiving PFM restorations. Data collection will occur at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years following rehabilitation. To evaluate patient experiences, validated questionnaires will be employed, including the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) to assess quality of life impacts, the Dental Satisfaction Questionnaire (DSQ) for overall satisfaction, and a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and comfort levels. Additionally, qualitative interviews will be conducted with a subset of participants to gain deeper insights into their experiences.
Results: It is anticipated that patients receiving zirconia restorations will report significantly higher satisfaction levels and more favourable PROs compared to those with PFM restorations. Key determinants of satisfaction, including aesthetic appeal and comfort, are expected to emerge from qualitative analyses.
Conclusion: This study aims to provide evidence-based insights that can guide clinical decisions regarding material selection in full mouth rehabilitation, underscoring the potential benefits of zirconia restorations in enhancing patient satisfaction.
Objective: This longitudinal study aims to explore patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction levels among adults undergoing full mouth rehabilitation with zirconia and porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) restorations.
Methods: A total of 60 adult participants requiring comprehensive dental rehabilitation will be recruited and randomly assigned to two groups: one receiving zirconia restorations and the other receiving PFM restorations. Data collection will occur at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years following rehabilitation. To evaluate patient experiences, validated questionnaires will be employed, including the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) to assess quality of life impacts, the Dental Satisfaction Questionnaire (DSQ) for overall satisfaction, and a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and comfort levels. Additionally, qualitative interviews will be conducted with a subset of participants to gain deeper insights into their experiences.
Results: It is anticipated that patients receiving zirconia restorations will report significantly higher satisfaction levels and more favourable PROs compared to those with PFM restorations. Key determinants of satisfaction, including aesthetic appeal and comfort, are expected to emerge from qualitative analyses.
Conclusion: This study aims to provide evidence-based insights that can guide clinical decisions regarding material selection in full mouth rehabilitation, underscoring the potential benefits of zirconia restorations in enhancing patient satisfaction.
Keywords
: Zirconia crown vs PFM crown
Full mouth rehabilitation PFM and Zirconia
