Quality of life and satisfaction of patients two years after endodontic and dental implant treatments performed by experienced practitioners

Objectives To compare oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) and patients´ satisfaction with root canal treatment (RCT) and dental implant (DI) therapy performed by experienced practitioners. Methods Patients with both an RCT and a DI performed respectively by an endodontist and an oral surgeon with more than 15 years of experience two years prior to the study were included. The survival and satisfactory outcome of both treatments were verified with clinical and radiographic data. Participants completed two constructed questionnaire (one for each treatment). OHRQoL assessment included 24 items (OHIP-14 plus other relevant 10 items from the original OHIP-49 questionnaire). Satisfaction regarding duration, cost and pain (both during and after treatment) of treatment was assessed with a 0-10 scale and perceptions with true/false questions. Weighted sums for each dimension, total OHIP scores, prevalence of impact and general satisfaction of patients were then calculated for DI and RCT and compared using the Wilcoxon test for related samples. Patients´ perceptions were compared with Chi-square test. Results Total OHIP scores were low for both treatments (8.82 and 7.87, respectively for RCT and DI). No significant differences were detected in OHIP total score or any dimension, except for physical pain (significantly higher for RCT than DI (p=0.044)). All patients were satisfied with both treatments; however, patients recalled that pain during treatment was significantly worse for RCT than DI (p=0.003). Conclusions High long-term OHRQoL and satisfaction is expected with either DI or RCT performed by experienced practitioners; however, physical pain dimension is higher for RCT. Clinical significance This study demonstrated a high satisfaction and long-term quality of life of patients undergoing both DI and RCT if treatments provide a functional balance and are performed by experienced practitioners. Very importantly, all participants had received both treatment modalities and being their own control eliminates individual variability