Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 16, 2026
Treatment of Facial Deformities using 3D Planning and Printing of Patient-Specific Implants
Published on: May 23, 2020
Treatment satisfaction with facial prostheses
Ting-Ling Chang1, Neal Garrett, Eleni Roumanas
1Division of Advanced Prosthodontics, Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, UCLA School of Dentistry, University of California-Los Angeles, 10833 Le Comte Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1668, USA. tlchang@dent.ucla.edu
Statement Of Problem:
Facial defects secondary to the treatment of neoplasms, congenital malformations, and trauma result in multiple functional and psychosocial difficulties. Prosthetic rehabilitation attempts to restore these facial disfigurements and may improve the level of function and self-esteem for these patients. However, a limited number of studies have evaluated the change in perceived quality of life after maxillofacial prosthetic rehabilitation.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients' perceptions of treatment with adhesive-retained and implant-retained facial prostheses and to assess differences in overall satisfaction with these 2 types of treatments.
Material And Methods:
In this study, a questionnaire with 28 items was administered for evaluation of perceptions of appearance, comfort, fit and irritation, reliability of retention, frequency of wear, ease of placement and removal, level of self-consciousness, and value of treatment. Subjects were categorized into 2 groups: adhesive-retained group (n=16) and implant-retained group (n=19). Comparisons were made for each item in the questionnaire using Fisher exact tests (alpha=.05).
Results:
The implant group reported higher positive ratings on all 28 questionnaire items when compared with the adhesive group. Statistically significant (P<.05) differences between the implant and adhesive groups were noted for ease of placement and removal, frequency of wear at home, and quality of retention during various activities, such as home chores and when perspiring or sneezing/coughing.
Conclusion:
The implant-retained facial prosthesis offers significant enhancement over an adhesive-retained prosthesis with respect to ease of use and retention during a variety of daily activities, resulting in greater use of the prosthesis.
