Article citationsMore >>

Chang TL, Garrett N, Roumanas E, Beumer J 3rd. Treatment satisfaction with facial prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Sep; 94 (3): 275-80.

has been cited by the following article:

Article

Patient-Centered Evaluation of Silicone Ocular Prostheses Fabricated by Two Different Techniques

1Assistant professor of prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt

2Assistant professor of Removable Prosthodontic, Faculty of Dentistry, Taif University, Taif, KSA

3Assistant professor of Fixed Prosthodontic, Faculty of Dentistry, Taif University, Taif, KSA


International Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2023, Vol. 11 No. 1, 1-8
DOI: 10.12691/ijcdr-11-1-1
Copyright © 2023 Science and Education Publishing

Cite this paper:
Mohamed Y. Abdelfattah, Nouf Al Humayyani. Patient-Centered Evaluation of Silicone Ocular Prostheses Fabricated by Two Different Techniques. International Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2023; 11(1):1-8. doi: 10.12691/ijcdr-11-1-1.

Correspondence to: Mohamed  Y. Abdelfattah, Assistant professor of prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt. Email: m.yousef@tudent.org

Abstract

Aim: Assessment of the effect of prosthodontic rehabilitation with silicone ocular prostheses fabricated from two different techniques on patient satisfaction using a modified questionnaire Material and Methods: 14 participants grouped into two groups; Group A: Planned to receive conventional silicone ocular prosthesis and Group B: receiving silicone ocular prosthesis lined with PVC thermoplastic sheet (Sof-tray sheets). After 9 months of using the orbital prosthetic device, the patients replied to a 10 items survey including aesthetics, self-assurance, retention, awareness of the prosthesis, insertion and removal problems, prosthetic home cleaning, restriction of social events, distress, and inflammation of the soft tissues, and advising others to try this technique. Responses were conveyed into a modified 100-mm horizontal visual scale. Answers means were transferred into a % proportion to characterize the index of individual satisfaction. A Friedman trials were utilized to judge answers between the two groups. Results: Excellent satisfaction indexes were displayed for all questions by most of patients in both groups, regarding group (A),silicone ocular prosthesis without lining, the lowermost proportion was the awareness of the prosthetic device, and the maximum proportion was the easiness of prosthesis elimination from its position. For group (B), silicone ocular prosthesis with PVC lining, maximum proportion was the advising others to use this method of rehabilitation, and the lowermost proportion was the prostheses awareness. There were excellent improvements in group (B) compared to group (A) regarding tear resistance and fungal resistance. Statistically significant improvement in group (B) than group (A) (p> 0.05) regarding ease of prosthesis cleanup, inflammation of underlying soft tissues, and retention. The other variables showed no significant difference. Conclusions: Great rate of patient satisfaction displayed that ocular prostheses constructed from silicone alone(Group A) and silicone lined with PVC liner (Group B) are good methods for rehabilitation of patients with ocular defects. The advantages of PVC liner include improved fungal resistance, increased tear resistance

Keywords