Clinical Oral Investigations

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 313–318 | Cite as

Association between patient satisfaction with complete dentures and oral health-related quality of life: two-year longitudinal assessment

  • Thomas Stober
  • Daniel Danner
  • Franziska Lehmann
  • Anne-Christiane Séché
  • Peter Rammelsberg
  • Alexander J. Hassel
Original Article


The objective was to evaluate the development of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in patients with complete dentures and the association between OHRQoL and patient satisfaction. Fifty-two patients (mean age, 66.3, 48.1% male) received dentures in at least one jaw. The analysis was conducted on participants with dentures in both jaws (CD-Both; n = 22) or in the upper jaw only (CD-Max; n = 28). Data were collected 4 weeks, 6 months, and 1 and 2 years after insertion. OHRQoL was measured by use of the OHIP-EDENT. Self-rated patient satisfaction was assessed on a scale of 0–10. To prove the hypothesis that patient satisfaction would be a meaningful predictor of OHRQoL, and not vice versa, multilevel analysis and cross-lagged correlation analysis were performed for both groups separately. OHRQoL improved from 22.9 (SD, 20.7) to 12.1 (SD, 14.5) for CD-Both and from 20.3 (SD, 17.2) to 14.7 (SD, 15.1) for CD-Max. Multilevel analysis revealed that patient satisfaction and OHRQoL were significantly associated (p < 0.0001) for both groups. Differences between the groups were found with regard to the effect of time after insertion and the interaction between time and satisfaction with OHRQoL which were significant only for the group CD-Both; however, no evidence was found for the causality of this association in the cross-lagged analysis for both groups (ZPF test, p > 0.016). Patient satisfaction and OHRQoL were associated for wearers of complete dentures. Within the limitations of the study, however, the causality that patient satisfaction predicts OHRQoL, and not vice versa, could not be proven.


Oral health-related quality of life Oral health impact profile Patient satisfaction Treatment outcomes Complete dentures Edentulism 



We thank Heraeus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany, for the financial support for this study. These financial resources were used to compensate the patients for their additional effort in attending recalls. We also thank Ian Davies, copy editor, for the English language revision.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Slade GD, Spencer AJ (1994) Development and evaluation of the oral health impact profile. Community Dent Health 11:3–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    John MT, Slade GD, Szentpétery A, Setz JM (2004) Oral health-related quality of life in patients treated with fixed, removable, and complete dentures 1 month and 6 to 12 months after treatment. Int J Prosthodont 17:503–511PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adam RZ, Geerts GA, Lalloo R (2007) The impact of new complete dentures on oral health-related quality of life. SADJ 62:264–266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Veyrune JL, Tubert-Jeannin S, Dutheil C, Riordan PJ (2005) Impact of new prostheses on the oral health related quality of life of edentulous patients. Gerodontology 22:3–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carlsson GE, Omar R (2010) The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. J Oral Rehabil 37:143–156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Awad MA, Lund JP, Shapiro SH, Locker D, Klemetti E, Chehade A et al (2003) Oral health status and treatment satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures: a randomized clinical trial in a senior population. Int J Prosthodont 16:390–396PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heydecke G, Locker D, Awad MA, Lund JP, Feine JS (2003) Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 31:161–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Feine JS, Carlsson GE (eds) (2003) Implant overdentures, The standard of care for edentulous patients. Quintessence, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    al Quran F, Clifford T, Cooper C, Lamey PJ (2001) Influence of psychological factors on the acceptance of complete dentures. Gerodontology 18:35–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fenlon MR, Sherriff M, Newton JT (2007) The influence of personality on patients’ satisfaction with existing and new complete dentures. J Dent 35:744–748PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Langer A, Michman J, Seifert I (1961) Factors influencing satisfaction with complete dentures in geriatric patients. J Prosthet Dent 11:1019–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wakabayashi N, Yatabe M, Ai M, Sato M, Nakamura K (1998) The influence of some demographic and clinical variables on psychosomatic traits of patients requesting replacement removable partial dentures. J Oral Rehabil 25:507–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shiina M, Kono M, Sato Y, Muraoka M, Kitagawa N (2008) Evaluation of new complete denture treatment by dentists and patients. Nihon Hotetsu Shika Gakkai Zasshi 52:301–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Berg E (1993) Acceptance of full dentures. Review. Int Dent J 43(Suppl 1):299–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bellini D, Dos Santos MB, De Paula Prisco Da Cunha V, Marchini L (2009) Patients’ expectations and satisfaction of complete denture therapy and correlation with locus of control. J Oral Rehabil 36:682–686PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Panek H, Krawczykowska H, Dobosz A, Napadłek P, Panek BA, Sosna-Gramza M (2006) Follow-up visits as a measure of adaptation process to removable prostheses. Gerodontology 23:87–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    de Souza e Silva ME, de Magalhães CS, Ferreira e Ferreira E (2009) Complete removable prostheses: from expectation to (dis)satisfaction. Gerodontology 26:143–149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fenlon MR, Sherriff M (2008) An investigation of factors influencing patients’ satisfaction with new complete dentures using structural equation modelling. J Dent 36:427–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bae KH, Kim C, Paik DI, Kim JB (2006) A comparison of oral health related quality of life between complete and partial removable denture-wearing older adults in Korea. J Oral Rehabil 33:317–322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hassel AJ, Rolko C, Grossmann AC, Ohlmann B, Rammelsberg P (2007) Correlations between self-ratings of denture function and oral health-related quality of life in different age groups. Int J Prosthodont 20:242–244PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Inukai M, Baba K, John MT, Igarashi Y (2008) Does removable partial denture quality affect individuals’ oral health? J Dent Res 87:736–739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Allen F, Locker D (2002) A modified short version of the oral health impact profile for assessing health-related quality of life in edentulous adults. Int J Prosthodont 15:446–450PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kenny DA, Harackiewicz JM (1979) Cross-lagged panel correlation: practice and promise. J Appl Psychol 64:372–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Campbell DT, Kenny DA (2003) A primer on regression artifacts. Guilford, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raghunathan TE, Rosenthal R, Rubin DB (1996) Comparing correlated but nonoverlapping correlations. Psychol Meth 1:178–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    John MT, Patrick DL, Slade GD (2002) The German version of the oral health impact profile—translation and psychometric properties. Eur J Oral Sci 110:425–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    John MT, Miglioretti DL, LeResche L, Koepsell TD, Hujoel P, Micheelis W (2006) German short forms of the oral health impact profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 34:277–288PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Souza RF, Patrocínio L, Pero AC, Marra J, Compagnoni MA (2007) Reliability and validation of a Brazilian version of the oral health impact profile for assessing edentulous subjects. J Oral Rehabil 34:821–826PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sutton AF, McCord JF (2007) A randomized clinical trial comparing anatomic, lingualized, and zero-degree posterior occlusal forms for complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 97:292–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grossmann AC, Hassel AJ, Schilling O, Lehmann F, Koob A, Rammelsberg P (2007) Treatment with double crown-retained removable partial dentures and oral health-related quality of life in middle- and high-aged patients. Int J Prosthodont 20:576–578PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    John MT, Szentpétery A, Steele JG (2007) Association between factors related to the time of wearing complete dentures and oral health-related quality of life in patients who maintained a recall. Int J Prosthodont 20:31–36PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    John MT, Reissmann DR, Szentpétery A, Steele J (2009) An approach to define clinical significance in prosthodontics. J Prosthodont 15:446–450Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Allen PF, O’Sullivan M, Locker D (2009) Determining the minimally important difference for the oral health impact profile-20. Eur J Oral Sci 117:129–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Locker D, Gibson B (2005) Discrepancies between self-ratings of and satisfaction with oral health in two older adult populations. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 33:280–288PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Stober
    • 1
  • Daniel Danner
    • 2
  • Franziska Lehmann
    • 1
  • Anne-Christiane Séché
    • 1
  • Peter Rammelsberg
    • 1
  • Alexander J. Hassel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ProsthodonticsHeidelberg University HospitalHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations