Longitudinal Changes in Patient-Reported Orofacial Esthetics (OES-G) Following Fixed and Removable Prosthodontic Treatment: An Observational Study.

IF 1.8
Malin Janson, Sarah Dederichs, Anja Liebermann, Christoph Matthias Schoppmeier
{"title":"Longitudinal Changes in Patient-Reported Orofacial Esthetics (OES-G) Following Fixed and Removable Prosthodontic Treatment: An Observational Study.","authors":"Malin Janson, Sarah Dederichs, Anja Liebermann, Christoph Matthias Schoppmeier","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate longitudinal changes in patient-reported orofacial esthetics during prosthodontic treatment using the German version of the Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES-G) and to assess differences according to prosthesis type and restoration stage.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective longitudinal observational study evaluated longitudinal OES-G data from 65 patients who underwent prosthodontic treatment, including fixed (n = 31) and removable (n = 34) prosthetic restorations. Orofacial esthetics were assessed using OES-G at baseline before treatment (T0), one week after treatment (T1), and two months after treatment (T2). Longitudinal changes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models with time, prosthesis type, restoration stage, and their interaction as fixed effects. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OES-G total scores increased significantly over time, rising from 51.5 ± 11.6 at baseline to 58.4 ± 8.9 at T1 and 60.3 ± 7.6 at T2. Significant time effects were observed in mixed-effects analyses (p < 0.001), with the largest improvement occurring between baseline and T2 (ΔM = +8.78, 95% CI +6.72 to +10.87). Definitive restorations were associated with significantly higher OES-G scores than provisional restorations (p = 0.021). Prosthesis type was not significantly associated with OES-G scores (p = 0.069); however, patients receiving removable prostheses demonstrated descriptively greater improvements over time. Internal consistency remained high across all assessment time points (Cronbach's α = 0.870-0.905).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patient-reported orofacial esthetics improved significantly following prosthodontic treatment and continued to evolve during follow-up. The findings support the OES-G as a reliable instrument for longitudinal assessment of patient-centered esthetic outcomes in prosthodontic care.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9959","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate longitudinal changes in patient-reported orofacial esthetics during prosthodontic treatment using the German version of the Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES-G) and to assess differences according to prosthesis type and restoration stage.

Materials and methods: This retrospective longitudinal observational study evaluated longitudinal OES-G data from 65 patients who underwent prosthodontic treatment, including fixed (n = 31) and removable (n = 34) prosthetic restorations. Orofacial esthetics were assessed using OES-G at baseline before treatment (T0), one week after treatment (T1), and two months after treatment (T2). Longitudinal changes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models with time, prosthesis type, restoration stage, and their interaction as fixed effects. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficients.

Results: OES-G total scores increased significantly over time, rising from 51.5 ± 11.6 at baseline to 58.4 ± 8.9 at T1 and 60.3 ± 7.6 at T2. Significant time effects were observed in mixed-effects analyses (p < 0.001), with the largest improvement occurring between baseline and T2 (ΔM = +8.78, 95% CI +6.72 to +10.87). Definitive restorations were associated with significantly higher OES-G scores than provisional restorations (p = 0.021). Prosthesis type was not significantly associated with OES-G scores (p = 0.069); however, patients receiving removable prostheses demonstrated descriptively greater improvements over time. Internal consistency remained high across all assessment time points (Cronbach's α = 0.870-0.905).

Conclusions: Patient-reported orofacial esthetics improved significantly following prosthodontic treatment and continued to evolve during follow-up. The findings support the OES-G as a reliable instrument for longitudinal assessment of patient-centered esthetic outcomes in prosthodontic care.

固定和活动义齿治疗后患者报告的口腔面部美学(OES-G)的纵向变化:一项观察性研究。
目的:采用德国版口腔面部美学量表(OES-G)调查患者在修复治疗过程中口腔面部美学的纵向变化,并根据修复体类型和修复阶段评估差异。材料和方法:本回顾性纵向观察研究评估了65例接受修复治疗的患者的纵向OES-G数据,包括固定(n = 31)和可拆卸(n = 34)假体修复体。在治疗前(T0)、治疗后1周(T1)和治疗后2个月(T2)采用OES-G评估口腔面部美学。采用线性混合效应模型分析纵向变化,并将时间、修复体类型、修复阶段及其相互作用作为固定效应。采用Cronbach’s alpha系数评估内部一致性。结果:OES-G总分随时间显著升高,从基线时的51.5±11.6分上升到T1时的58.4±8.9分和T2时的60.3±7.6分。在混合效应分析中观察到显著的时间效应(p < 0.001),最大的改善发生在基线和T2之间(ΔM = +8.78, 95% CI +6.72至+10.87)。最终修复体的OES-G评分明显高于临时修复体(p = 0.021)。假体类型与OES-G评分无显著相关(p = 0.069);然而,随着时间的推移,接受可移动假体的患者表现出更大的改善。所有评估时间点的内部一致性仍然很高(Cronbach’s α = 0.870-0.905)。结论:患者报告的口腔面部美学在修复治疗后显著改善,并在随访中继续发展。研究结果支持OES-G作为一种可靠的工具,用于纵向评估修复护理中以患者为中心的美学结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书