The comparison of different coronal restorations of endodontically treated posterior teeth on the patients' quality of life and satisfaction

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Istanbul Okan University, Istanbul, Turkey

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Istanbul Okan University, Istanbul, Turkey

3 Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Istanbul Okan University, Istanbul, Turkey

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Everyday lives of individuals can be affected by dental treatments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impacts of coronal restorations of endodontically treated posterior teeth (ETPT) on the patient's satisfaction and quality of life (QoL).
METHODS: This cross-sectional clinical study was conducted at School of Dentistry, Istanbul Okan University, Istanbul, Turkey, using the semantic differential scale, Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14), and clinical assessments. Electronic charts and files of patients who received endodontic treatment and coronal restoration from June 2018 to January 2019 were reviewed. The patients included in the study had been treated by the same endodontist and restorative dental specialist. The coronal restoration of the ETPT had to be either direct composite restoration (DCR) or indirect ceramic restoration (ICR). 123 patients were deemed fit for this study. A rendezvous was created for the patients who agreed to participate in the study (n = 115) and those who came to the appointment were checked for the inclusion criteria. After clinical examinations, 68 patients filled in the questionnaires. Demographic information, the semantic differential scale, and the OHIP-14 scores-provided data were analyzed by Mann-Whitney U test, independent samples t-test, and the chi-square test. Statistical significance level was considered at P < 0.05.
RESULTS: 68 patients (n = 34 in each group) participated in the study. DCR and ICR groups had similar mean OHIP-14 scores (5.03 ± 3.36 and 5.15 ± 6.17, respectively) and general satisfaction scores (9.76 ± 0.43 and 9.88 ± 0.33, respectively) (P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the satisfaction values of the two groups regarding cost, time involved, pain, aesthetics, chewing ability, pleasantness, and general satisfaction (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: According to the results of the present study, both treatment options have created similar satisfaction for patients and offered high QoL.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Siqueira JF, Rocas IN, Alves FR, Campos LC. Periradicular status related to the quality of coronal restorations and root canal fillings in a Brazilian population. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2005; 100(3): 369-74.
  2. Baba NZ, Goodacre CJ. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth: contemporary concepts and future perspectives. Endod Topics 2014; 31(1): 68-83.
  3. Dammaschke T, Nykiel K, Sagheri D, Schafer E. Influence of coronal restorations on the fracture resistance of root canal-treated premolar and molar teeth: a retrospective study. Aust Endod J 2013; 39(2): 48-56.
  4. Kopperud SE, Tveit AB, Gaarden T, Sandvik L, Espelid I. Longevity of posterior dental restorations and reasons for failure. Eur J Oral Sci 2012; 120(6): 539-48.
  5. Han SH, Sadr A, Tagami J, Park SH. Internal adaptation of resin composites at two configurations: Influence of polymerization shrinkage and stress. Dent Mater 2016; 32(9): 1085-94.
  6. Vohra F, Baloch H, Ab Ghani SM. Modern adhesive ceramic onlay, a predictable replacement of full veneer crowns: A report of three cases. J Dow Univ Health Sci 2014; 8(1): 35-40.
  7. Desai PD, Das UK. Comparison of fracture resistance of teeth restored with ceramic inlay and resin composite: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2011; 22(6): 877.
  8. Collares K, Correa MB, Laske M, Kramer E, Reiss B, Moraes RR, et al. A practice-based research network on the survival of ceramic inlay/onlay restorations. Dent Mater 2016; 32(5): 687-94.
  9. Torres CRG, Mailart MC, Crastechini E, Feitosa FA, Esteves SRM, Di Nicolo R, et al. A randomized clinical trial of class II composite restorations using direct and semidirect techniques. Clin Oral Investig 2020; 24(2): 1053-63.
  10. Shor A, Nicholls JI, Phillips KM, Libman WJ. Fatigue load of teeth restored with bonded direct composite and indirect ceramic inlays in MOD class II cavity preparations. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16(1): 64-9.
  11. Gokturk H, Karaarslan ES, Tekin E, Hologlu B, Sarikaya I. The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars. BMC Oral Health 2018; 18(1): 196.
  12. McGrath C, Bedi R. Population based norming of the UK oral health related quality of life measure (OHQoL-UK). Br Dent J 2002; 193(9): 521-4.
  13. Pesaressi E, Villena RS, Frencken JE. Dental caries and oral health-related quality of life of 3-year-olds living in Lima, Peru. Int J Paediatr Dent 2020; 30(1): 57-65.
  14. Sterenborg BAMM, Bronkhorst EM, Wetselaar P, Lobbezoo F, Loomans BAC, Huysmans MDNJ. The influence of management of tooth wear on oral health-related quality of life. Clin Oral Investig 2018; 22(7): 2567-73.
  15. Slade GD, Spencer AJ. Development and evaluation of the Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent Health 1994; 11(1): 3-11.
  16. Hamasha AA, Hatiwsh A. Quality of life and satisfaction of patients after nonsurgical primary root canal treatment provided by undergraduate students, graduate students and endodontic specialists. Int Endod J 2013; 46(12): 1131-9.
  17. Kassis C, Khoury P, Mehanna CZ, Baba NZ, Bou Chebel F, Daou M, et al. Effect of inlays, onlays and endocrown cavity design preparation on fracture resistance and fracture mode of endodontically treated teeth: An in vitro study. J Prosthodont 2021; 30(7): 625-31.
  18. Liu P, McGrath C, Cheung GS. Improvement in oral health-related quality of life after endodontic treatment: A prospective longitudinal study. J Endod 2014; 40(6): 805-10.
  19. Orstavik D, Kerekes K, Eriksen HM. The periapical index: A scoring system for radiographic assessment of apical periodontitis. Endod Dent Traumatol 1986; 2(1): 20-34.
  20. Su N, van Wijk A, Visscher CM. Psychosocial oral health-related quality of life impact: A systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2021; 48(3): 282-92.
  21. Slade GD. Derivation and validation of a short-form oral health impact profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1997; 25(4): 284-90.
  22. Mumcu G, Inanc N, Ergun T, Ikiz K, Gunes M, Islek U, et al. Oral health related quality of life is affected by disease activity in Behcet's disease. Oral Dis 2006; 12(2): 145-51.
  23. Allen PF. Assessment of oral health related quality of life. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 40.
  24. Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH. The Measurement of Meaning. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press; 1957.
  25. Dietschi D, Duc O, Krejci I, Sadan A. Biomechanical considerations for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review of the literature--Part 1. Composition and micro- and macrostructure alterations. Quintessence Int 2007; 38(9): 733-43.
  26. Varlan C, Dimitriu B, Varlan V, Bodnar D, Suciu I. Current opinions concerning the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: Basic principles. J Med Life 2009; 2(2): 165-72.
  27. Cimilli H, Karacayli U, +Pi+man N, Kartal N, Mumcu G. Comparison of the oral health-related quality of life and dental pain in symptomatic irreversible pulpitis and pericoronitis. J Dent Sci 2012; 7(3): 250-60.
  28. Dugas NN, Lawrence HP, Teplitsky P, Friedman S. Quality of life and satisfaction outcomes of endodontic treatment. J Endod 2002; 28(12): 819-27.
  29. Sischo L, Broder HL. Oral health-related quality of life: What, why, how, and future implications. J Dent Res 2011; 90(11): 1264-70.
  30. Rocca GT, Krejci I. Bonded indirect restorations for posterior teeth: from cavity preparation to provisionalization. Quintessence Int 2007; 38(5): 371-9.
  31. Yamanel K, Caglar A, Gulsahi K, Ozden UA. Effects of different ceramic and composite materials on stress distribution in inlay and onlay cavities: 3-D finite element analysis. Dent Mater J 2009; 28(6): 661-70.
  32. Murgueitio R, Bernal G. Three-year clinical follow-up of posterior teeth restored with leucite-reinforced ips empress onlays and partial veneer crowns. J Prosthodont 2012; 21(5): 340-5.
  33. Abduo J, Sambrook RJ. Longevity of ceramic onlays: A systematic review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018; 30(3): 193-215.
  34. Batalha-Silva S, de Andrada MA, Maia HP, Magne P. Fatigue resistance and crack propensity of large MOD composite resin restorations: Direct versus CAD/CAM inlays. Dent Mater 2013; 29(3): 324-31.
Journal of Oral Health and Oral Epidemiology
Volume 10, Issue 4
December 2021
Pages 193-201

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 31 December 2020
  • Revise Date: 12 August 2021
  • Accept Date: 01 September 2021

Share

How to cite

Statistics