Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Satisfaction Audit of Patients Undergoing Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis with Extra-Oral Distraction Appliances

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this research was to evaluate the level of satisfaction of patients who were undergoing distraction osteogenesis of mandible with extraoral distraction appliance.

Material and Methods

The prospective study was performed on 13 patients with facio-mandibular deformity reporting to the Oral Health Sciences Center, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India, who required surgical and orthodontic intervention for correction. A standardized multiple choice questionnaire was provided to all patients at 3 stages of treatment i.e. during predistraction, distraction and post distraction period.

Results

Predistraction evaluation showed that the main reason for patients to seek treatment was lack of facial esthetics and all of them were sure that there would be a change in their lives after they underwent this treatment procedure. During distraction phase the most common complaint was pain. None of the patients felt that they were suffering during active distraction phase and all felt that they made the right decision. In post distraction phase, all patients were satisfied with the treatment and felt that the treatment was worth it. Twelve out of 13 patients would recommend treatment to others without any hesitation.

Conclusion

Our study concludes that distraction osteogenesis of the mandible with extra-oral appliances is acceptable to patients, and improved facial appearance is a positive influence. The appliance and results of the procedure are socially accepted and appreciated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cunnigham SJ, Feinmann C, Horrocks EN (1995) Psychological problems following orthognathic surgery. J Clin Orthod 29(12):755–757

    Google Scholar 

  2. Phillips C, Bennett ME, Broder HL (1998) Dentofacial disharmony: psychological status of patients seeking treatment consultation. Angle Orthod 68(6):547–556

    PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cunningham SJ, Gilthorpe MS, Hunt NP (2000) Are orthognathic patients different? Eur J Orthod 22(2):195–202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McCarthy JG, Stelnicki EF, Grayson BH (1999) Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible: a ten year experience. Sem Orthod 5(1):3–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N, Thorne CH, Grayson BH (1992) Legthening of human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg 89(1):1–8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hurmerinta K, Hukki J (2001) Vector control in lower jaw distraction osteogenesis using an extra-oral multidirectional device. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 29(5):263–270

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cai M, Lu X, Shen G, Wang X, Cheng AH (2011) Customized bifocal and trifocal transport distraction osteogenesis device for extensive mandibular reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg 22(2):562–565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim Y, Park S, Son W, Kim S, Kim Y, Mah J (2010) Treatment of an ankylosed maxillary incisor by intraoral alveolar bone distraction osteogenesis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 138(2):215–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Buis J, Rousseau P, Soupre V, Martinez H, Diner PA, Vazquez MP (2001) Distraction of grafted alveolar bone in cleft case using endosseous implant. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 38(4):405–409

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Goldwaser BR, Papadaki ME, Kaban LB, Troulis MJ (2012) Automated continuous mandibular distraction osteogenesis: review of the literature. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70(2):407–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pelo S, Gasparini G, Di Petrillo A, Tamburrini G, Di Rocco C (2007) Distraction osteogenesis in the surgical treatment of craniostenosis: a comparison of internal and external craniofacial distractor devices. Childs Nerv Syst 23(12):1447–1453

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Primrose C, Broadfoot E, Diner PA, Molina F, Moos KF (2005) Patients’ responses to distraction osteogenesis: a multi-centre study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 34(3):238–242

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ayoub AF, Duncan CM, McLean GR, Moos KF, Chibbaro PD (2002) Response of patients and families to lengthening of the facial bones by extraoral distraction osteogenesis: a review of 14 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40(5):397–405

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McCarthy JG (2007) Principles of craniofacial distraction. In: Thorne CH (ed) Grabb and Smith’s plastic surgery. Wolters Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 96–102

    Google Scholar 

  15. Finlay PM, Atkinson JM, Moos KF (1995) Orthognathic surgery: patient expectations; psychological profile and satisfaction with outcome. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 33(1):9–14

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Williams AC, Shah H, Sandy JR, Travess HC (2005) Patients’ motivations for treatment and their experiences of orthodontic preparation for orthognathic surgery. J Orthod 32(3):191–202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rustemeyer J, Eke Z, Bremerich A (2010) Perception of improvement after orthognathic surgery: the important variables affecting patient satisfaction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 14(3):155–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nurminen L, Pietila T, Vinkka-Puhakka H (1999) Motivation for and satisfaction with orthodontic-surgical treatment: a retrospective study of 28 patients. Eur J Orthod 21(1):79–87

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Guyette TW, Polley JW, Figueroa A, Botts J, Smith BE (2001) Changes in speech following unilateral mandibular distraction osteogenesis in patients with hemifacial microsomia. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 38(2):179–184

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Genecov DG, Barcelo’ CR, Steinberg D, Trone T, Sperry E (2009) Clinical experience with the application of distraction osteogenesis for airway obstruction. J Craniofac Surg 20(Suppl 2):1817–1821

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Senders CW, Kolstad KK, Tollefson TT, Sykes JM (2010) Mandibular distraction osteogenesis used to treat upper airway obstruction. Arch Facial Plast Surg 12(1):11–15

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhou YH, Hagg U, Rabie AB (2001) Patient satisfaction following orthognathic surgical correction of skeletal class III malocclusion. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 16(2):99–107

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lazaridou-Terzoudi T, Kiyak HA, Moore R, Athanasiou AE, Melson B (2003) Longterm assessment of psychologic outcomes of orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 61(5):545–552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interests

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthodontics, Rayat Bahra Dental College and Hospital, Sahauran Campus, Mohali, Punjab, India

    Renu Datta

  2. Unit of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Orthopedics, Oral Health Sciences Center, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector 12, Chandigarh, 160012, India

    Ashok Utreja

  3. Department of Orthodontics, Oral Health Sciences Center, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector 12, Chandigarh, India

    S. P. Singh

  4. Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Health Sciences Center, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector 12, Chandigarh, 160012, India

    Vidya Rattan

  5. H.No.416, Sector 37 A, Chandigarh, 160036, India

    Renu Datta

Authors
  1. Renu Datta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ashok Utreja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. P. Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vidya Rattan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renu Datta.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 39 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Datta, R., Utreja, A., Singh, S.P. et al. Satisfaction Audit of Patients Undergoing Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis with Extra-Oral Distraction Appliances. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. 14, 212–218 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-013-0606-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-013-0606-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation