SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Clinical outcomes were assessed in 47 patients with 88 LD crowns using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria and survival rates. The questionnaire for predictors included 3 aspects: (a) sociodemographic characteristics, (b) oral health habits (tooth brushing frequency, flossing frequency, and dental visits), and (c) satisfaction of the restorations (aesthetics, function, fit, cleansability, and chewing ability of the crowns, and overall satisfaction). Frequency distributions were computed using univariate and multivariate analysis. The Student t test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to compare means across variables. Correlation analysis was done to assess the association between continuous variables.
RESULTS: The age of crowns was 34.7 ± 9.7 months. The survival rate was 96.6% at 35.9 ± 9.2 months. There was a significant association between successful crown function and oral hygiene measures: tooth brushing (p˂ 0.001), dental visits (p = 0.006), and flossing (p = 0.009). A strong negative correlation was observed between aesthetic satisfaction (r = -0.717, p˂ 0.001) and chewing ability (r = -0.639, p˂ 0.001) with crown age. The linear regression model was significant for all predictors (p < 0.05) except overall satisfaction (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The LD crowns had long survival rates of 96.6% up to 35.9 ± 9.2 months and provided satisfactory clinical performance (low risk of failure). Oral hygiene habits such as brushing, flossing, and regular dental visits influenced patient satisfaction with LD crowns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved 150 subjects attending the Primary Care Unit with no history of orthodontic treatment. The Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) with 10 occlusal characteristics were measured on study models. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) was assessed with the Malaysian version of the Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire (OHIP-14). The Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the relationship between the malocclusion and quality of life.
RESULTS: Significantly weak correlations (r = .176) were found between the DAI and the OHRQoL. Females and the younger age group (12-19 years) tended to score higher on the OHIP-14 than their counterparts. For males, domain 3 (psychological discomfort; r = .462), domain 4 (physical disability; r = .312), domain 7 (handicap; r = .309), and overall score (r = .289) were weak correlates but significant to the DAI compared with females. The older age group showed a significant weak correlation in domain 3 (psychological discomfort; r = .268) and domain 7 (handicap; r = .238), whereas the younger age group showed no correlation with any domain.
CONCLUSIONS: The DAI score does not predict the effect of malocclusion on the OHRQoL.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study participants were 113 persons with DS from the selected community-based rehabilitation center who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Ten occlusal characteristics of the Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) were measured on study models to determine the degree of malocclusion. A single score represented the dentofacial anomalies, determined the level of severity, and determined the need for orthodontic treatment.
RESULTS: Crowding in the anterior maxillary and mandibular arch was the main malocclusion problems among the subjects with DS. Comparison between age group and genders revealed no significant differences in four categories of orthodontic treatment need (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: Most of the subjects with DS (94; 83.2%) had severe and very severe malocclusion, which indicated a desirable and mandatory need for orthodontic treatment.