Abstract
ObjectivesPeriodontal healing is often accompanied by side effects, which may cause an aesthetic deficit. The present investigation was focussed to compare patient's subjective perception of their posttherapy aesthetics with the objective measures of the results.Materials and methodsSurvey results from patients (subjective parameters) on oral status and aesthetics were compared against routine clinical parameters and corresponding survey results from treating dentists (objective parameters), both before and after periodontal treatment. Subjective outcome parameters were then suitably transformed and compared with the objective ones to investigate the agreement between patients' perception and actual outcomes.ResultsObjective recordings of periodontal status by the dentist and subjective awareness of the patient are quite contradictory to each other for almost all participants. Further, it was found that their aesthetics in the front were better after treatment, but dentist professionals targeted for future treatment needs.ConclusionsIn this study, it was found that patients improved aesthetically on the upper jaw front after the therapy, which was not shared by the dentists. This discrepancy was due to the clinicians' view on more aesthetic corrective procedures than on patients' need.
Highlights
IntroductionBackground rationaleThe primary goal for the prevention and therapy of periodontitis is the establishment and the preservation of the secondary oral health (Ramfjord, 1993)
Background rationaleThe primary goal for the prevention and therapy of periodontitis is the establishment and the preservation of the secondary oral health (Ramfjord, 1993)
Materials and methods: Survey results from patients on oral status and aesthetics were compared against routine clinical parameters and corresponding survey results from treating dentists, both before and after periodontal treatment
Summary
Background rationaleThe primary goal for the prevention and therapy of periodontitis is the establishment and the preservation of the secondary oral health (Ramfjord, 1993). Despite actively informing patients of possible negative aesthetic side effects, including the risk of developing dentine hypersensitivity, patients may only realize what this means for them personally once treatment is completed, and respective additional therapy need may emerge (Schmidlin, 2012). Based on these risks, potential side effects, and the subjective clinical experience, the gut feeling of many dentists and hygienists remains that patients become overall healthier, but that unwanted and negative secondary side effects due to dentin exposure inevitably lead to subjectively and objectively perceived aesthetic and functional impairments
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
