HUGEI’,
prosthodontics. However. the results of an in vitro study have suggested that these materials ma) undergo tarnish and corrosion in the oral environment:’ Presently, the long-term in vivo serviceability of alloys of low nobility remains uncertain. A clinical study designed to clarify this matter has been initiated. SUMMARY
VERMILYEA,
ANI)
b’1I.C \
REFERENCES I.
z\merican Dental Association: Guide to Den ta: .Ll;~teL:i~ and Devices, cd 6. Chicago, 1972. Americarl Drntal Asswi+ rion, pp 207-209.
3.
liuge:, I< 1;.. Vcrmilyea, S. G., Modawar-, F. A.. ai:d dc Simon. 1.. li Electrochemical behavior of dental ,gold alloys. Milit .Med li.5:701. 1980.
Properties, heat treatment characteristics, composition, and microstructure of three low-gold dental casting alloys were studied. The materials exhibited vast compositional differences but strikingly similar structural features. Laboratory evaluation of the properties of these test materials suggest their potential use in fixed prosthodontics.
IADR PROSTHODONTIC
ABSTRACT
Perceived
dental changes and attitudes
D. J. Conny,
J. D. Brewer,
of fixed prosthodontic
patients
and L. A. Tedesco
State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, N.Y.
Presently, few data are available that describe why patients seek fixed prosthodontic treatment, their perceptions of treatment benefit, and dental changes experienced during treatment. Based on experience with provisional crowns and fixed partial dentures, patients often raise questions about characteristics of definitive restorations and benefits of treatment. The purpose of this study was to explore these issues from the patient’s perspective. Fifty-one patients rated attitude statements on Likert-type scales about changes experienced during treatment, importance of various dental characteristics, and benefits of treatment. When compared to provisional restorations, 59% agreed that their definitive restorations were more lifelike, 76% agreed that they provided
162
an increased feeling of permanence, and 61 YOagreed on improved chewing function. Dental characteristics rated important to extremely important were color (78%), chewing (98%), and permanence (93%). Treatment was reported as beneficial for dental-facial appearance (82%), oral functioning (73%), and dental comfort (77%). Impressions and tooth preparation were rated as the more unpleasant treatment procedures. The strongest influence on seeking treatment was appearance (59%), while chewing (23%), dental pain (16%), and speech (6%) were much less influential. When asked to consider the time, effort, and money spent for treatment, 96% reported they would seek it again. Discussion will focus on the relationship between patient perceptions of esthetics and function, and their potential influence on prosthodontic treatment satisfaction.
AUGUST
1982
VOLUME
48
NUMBER
2