Development, validity and clinical testing of the authors’ technique for the assessment of implant prosthesis quality in older adults and elderly patients

Relevance. The studies which assess the quality of the implant-supported prostheses in elderly patients as well as the impact of the immediate loading on the peri-implant bone are scarce and inconclusive. Various automatic assessment software is known and applied in the clinic. A compact, informative and flexible software is obviously necessary for daily use and continuous control of the quality of the prosthetic treatment. The aim of studies was to improve the automatic quality assessment of implant prostheses in older adults and elderly patients.
Materials and methods. 408 responders (151 male and 257 female subjects) aged from 54 to 85 (mean age 73.9 ± 4.9) participated in the clinical testing of the ROZA questionnaire. The conceptual (construct) validity included convergent, divergent and discriminant subtypes. In convergent validity, comparison with a battery of equivalent tests with similar requirements was used: Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI), Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) questionnaire, visual analogue scale (VAS) set and two related expert prosthesis quality assessment programs TREVOL and TRESIM.
Results. Cronbach’s alpha, that confirms reliability and internal stability of the studied instrument, was 0.82 which is a good level. The correlation of the authors’ technique was low and insignificant (r = 0.242; p = 0.257) compared to the discriminant tests, which demonstrated the target focus of the studied technique.
Conclusion. The studied questionnaire ROZA was highly sensitive, reliable for the examination of elderly patients with different implant-supported prostheses. It can be used to assess the quality of the prostheses in elderly, among others to evaluate the quality of the prosthetic treatment.

1. Atchison K, Dolan T. Development of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index. Journal of dental education. 1990;54(11):680-687. doi: 10.1002/j.0022-0337.1990.54.11.tb02481.x

2. Slade G, Speneer A. Development and evaluation of the Oral Health Impact Profile. community dental health Journal. 1994;11(1):3-11.

3. Johansson G, Söderfeldt B, Gerdin EW, Halling A. Measuring oral health from a public health perspective. Swedish dental Journal. 2008;32(3):125-37. Available from: https://tandlakarforbundet.se/app/uploads/2017/01/sdj-2008-3.pdf

4. Trezubov VN, Rozov RA, Sapronova ON, Kousevitsky LA, Kobzeva SA, Petrakov DS, Privalov VV. Assessment of the quality of dentures and jaw prostheses (computer program). The dental Institute. 2006;(3):32-33. (In Russ.). Available from: https://instom.spb.ru/catalog/article/8898/?view=pdf

5. Rozov RA, Trezubov VN, inventors; Rozov RA, assignee. Computer program for the examination of the quality of extended implantable prostheses with a small number of supports „ROZA”. Russian Federation computer program certificate RU 2020666349. 2020 December 08. (in Russ.)

6. Cronbach L, Meehl P. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin. 1955;(52):281-302. doi: 10.1037/h0040957

7. Campbell DT. Models of experiments in social psychology and applied researches. Мoscow: Progress. 384 p. (in Russ.).

8. Cooper C. Individual differences. 2nd edition. Hodder Education Publishers; 2002. 352 p.

9. Tubert-Yeannin S. Validation of an Oral Health Quality of life index (GOHAI) in France. community dentistry and oral epidemiology. 2003;(31):275-284. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2003.t01-1-00006.x

10. Wan-Nasir W. Validation of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) in the Malay Language. Journal of Public health dentistry. 2006;66(3):199-204. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2006.tb02580.x

11. Tkacheva ON, Runikhina NK, Ostapenko VS, Sharashkina NV, Mkhitaryan EA, Onuchina US, Lysenkov SN. Validation of the questionnaire for screening frailty. Advances in gerontology. 2017;30(2):236-242. (In Russ.). Available from: http://www.gersociety.ru/netcat_files/userfiles/10/AG_2017-30-02.pdf

12. Trezubov VN, Volkovoy OA, Zinchenko VA, Shevchuk OI, inventors; Volkovoy OA, assignee. Expert computer program for implant prosthesis quality evaluation “TREVOL”. Russian Federation computer program certificate RU 2017663483. 2017 December 5. (in Russ.)

13. Trezubov VN, Simonenko AA, Rozov RA, Zinchenko VA, Shevchuk OI, inventors; Simonenko AA, Trezubov VN, assignee. Computer program for the assessment of the quality of dental implant treatment “TRESIM”. Russian Federation computer program certificate RU 2019661193. 2019 August 21. (in Russ.).

14. Ware J, Snow K, Kosinski N, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey. Manuel and interpretation guide. Lincoln, Rl Quality Metric Incorporated; 2000. 150 p. Available from: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/SF-36-healthsurvey%3A-Manual-and-interpretation-Ware/c4262cefae0217aee75dbc23400fc74d3ad416f6?p2df

15. Leontyev DA. Life-Sense Orientation Test. Moscow: Sense; 2000. 18 p. (In Russ.). Available from: http://publishing.smysl.ru/book/sgo/ManSGO.pdf

16. Mericske-Stern R. Within – subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients satisfaction and prosthetic results. clinical Implant dentistry and related research. 2009;11:228-237. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00109.x

17. Rozov RA, Trezubov VN, Liddelow G. Clinical and radiographic classification of implant supported prosthesis for edentulous patients. Parodontologiya. 2019;24(2):157-160. doi: 10.33925/1683-3759-2019-24-2-157-160