Department of Endodontics, University of Washington School of Dentistry, Seattle, WA 98195-7448, USA.
J Endod. 2011 Jul;37(7):903-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.03.026. Epub 2011 May 17.
Up-to-date studies comparing endodontic treatment versus implant-supported prosthesis have shown similar clinical outcome and survival rates. However, no data are available comparing both treatment modalities based on the patient's perception of quality of life. This study was designed to qualitatively describe and compare the quality of life of patients with restored, single endodontically treated teeth versus patients with single implant-supported fixed prostheses.
Forty-eight patients agreed to participate in the study (n = 24 from each treatment modality). Of those, 37 actually participated in the study: 17 were endodontically treated and 20 had an implant-supported prosthesis. Patients in each of the two groups were randomly selected from the Graduate Endodontics and Graduate Periodontics Departments, respectively. Six focus group discussions (n = 3 per treatment group) were held and audio-recorded for subsequent thematic analysis. Data were analyzed to identify common themes within each category and compared to assess any differences in quality of life between the two treatments. Additionally, a quality of life survey, the shortened version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14), was given before the discussion group and the responses analyzed.
The results obtained from this study show similar overall OHIP scores and show a high rate of satisfaction with both treatment modalities. Content analysis of the discussion groups revealed several themes and subthemes. The major themes were importance of overall health, financial implications of the treatments, perception of the treatments and its outcomes, time since treatment, and follow-up dental visits.
The results help identify patients' perception and concerns with each treatment modality and assist the clinician and patient in the selection of an optimal treatment for their given situation. In addition to the prognosis and outcomes, clinicians should consider patients' perceptions and preferences as well as the influence each therapy may have on their quality of life, both short- and long-term. Overall, all the participants in this study were pleased with the treatment received and expressed a clear message to save their natural dentition whenever possible.
最新的研究比较了根管治疗与种植体支持修复体的临床效果和生存率，结果显示两者具有相似的临床效果和存活率。然而，目前尚无基于患者生活质量感知来比较这两种治疗方式的数据。本研究旨在定性描述和比较经根管治疗后单个牙修复和单个种植体支持固定修复患者的生活质量。
48 名患者同意参与研究（每组 24 名，根管治疗组和种植体支持修复组各 24 名）。其中 37 名患者实际参与了研究：17 名接受根管治疗，20 名接受种植体支持修复。两组患者均分别随机选自牙体牙髓病学研究生和牙周病学研究生课程。共进行了 6 次焦点小组讨论（每组 3 名），并对讨论内容进行录音，以便进行主题分析。对数据进行分析以确定每个类别中的共同主题，并比较两种治疗方法的生活质量差异。此外，在讨论组之前还进行了生活质量调查，即简化版口腔健康影响量表（OHIP-14），并对结果进行了分析。
本研究结果显示，两种治疗方式的 OHIP 总分相似，且患者对两种治疗方式的满意度均较高。焦点小组讨论的内容分析揭示了几个主题和子主题。主要主题包括整体健康的重要性、治疗的经济影响、对治疗及其结果的看法、治疗后的时间以及后续的牙科就诊。
研究结果有助于确定患者对每种治疗方式的看法和关注点，并帮助临床医生和患者根据患者的具体情况选择最佳治疗方案。除了预后和结果外，临床医生还应考虑患者的感知和偏好，以及每种治疗方法对其短期和长期生活质量的影响。总的来说，本研究的所有参与者对接受的治疗都感到满意，并明确表示只要有可能，就应保留天然牙。
