Patients’ self-report on post-retained restoration is more valuable than expected! Explorative analysis of an 11-year follow-up
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1080/00016357.2018.1497804Keywords:
Endodontic post, endodontically treated teeth, long-term clinical trial, post-endodontic restorations, self-reportAbstract
Objective: Assessment of long-term clinical data regarding post-endodontic restorations is essential for the evaluation of different post-and-core concepts. The aim of the present study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of patient self-reporting on post-endodontic restorations after 11 years of clinical service.
Materials and methods: Twenty-nine patients (61 ± 15 years old) with endodontic glass-fibre and titanium post-endodontic restorations were examined within the 11-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Restorations were assessed by self-reports during a telephone interview (one item), the completion of a four-item questionnaire and clinical and radiographic examination. A gold standard for restoration in situ or ‘failure’ was defined by clinical and radiographic examination. Diagnostic accuracy of patients’ self-reports was evaluated by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV).
Results: After a mean observation time of 137 months (min/max: 125/154 months), 25 (86.2%) restorations were in situ and 4 (13.8%) failures were detected. Self-report during a telephone interview and the four-item questionnaire correctly identified all in situ restorations (specificity = both 100%, NPV = 92.6%/96.2%). Self-report during a telephone interview identified two out of four failures (sensitivity = 50%, PPV = 100%), and self-report on the four-item questionnaire identified three out of four failures (sensitivity = 75%, PPV = 100%).
Conclusions: When the clinical examination is not feasible, patients’ self-report shows valuable diagnostic potential in the identification of the post-endodontic failure.
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica publishes original research papers as well as critical reviews relevant to the diagnosis, epidemiology, health service, prevention, aetiology, pathogenesis, pathology, physiology, microbiology, development and treatment of diseases affecting tissues of the oral cavity and associated structures including papers on cause and effect or explanatory/associative relationships for experimental or observational studies.