Methods: Data were collected by means of self-administered questionnaire during July 2004-January 2005 at four dental offices located in Japan. Questionnaire was consists of self-perceived oral health, request for treatment, the Japanese short version of the Oral Health Impact Profile for Prosthesis (OHIP-JP16). Inclusion criteria were patients were not under prosthodontic treatment, answered all 16 items of the OHIP-JP16 and requested implant treatment or conventional denture treatment. Thirty-one patients were satisfied inclusion criteria. Patients who requested implant treatment (implant group) were 12, and requested conventional denture treatment (denture group) were 19. The mean OHIP-JP16 total scores and the mean scores of subscales between groups were analyzed by the Mann-Whitney U-test. Chi square tests were used compare responses to individual items. All analyses were performed using the SPSS for Windows version 13.0.
Results: No differences in denture status, self-perceived oral health, number of teeth were found between two groups. Denture group had better OHIP-JP16 total scores than implant group, but it was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Chi square tests were performed for each of 16 items. The number of patients reported ‘any impact' was significantly greater (p<0.05) in the implant group in the following items; ‘worried', 'self-conscious', ‘diet unsatisfactory', ‘upset' and ‘life unsatisfactory' (p=0.005). Physical discomfort was significantly lower in denture group.
Conclusion: The OHIP-JP16 scores of the patients who requested implant treatment were significantly higher in ‘psychological discomfort' than requested conventional denture. The results of this study suggested that there might be OHRQoL differences between patients who requested implant treatment and patients who requested conventional denture treatment.