Caroliene Meijndert

52 Chapter 3 Aesthetic rating and patient satisfaction A summary of the aesthetic evaluation and the patient satisfaction score is shown in Table 5 . Mean PES at T 12 was 6.9±1.8 and had not significantly decreased at T 60 (6.6±1.7, p=0.30, Wilcoxon Signed Rank test). Also theWES score hardly showed changes between T 12 and T 60 (from 7.5±1.7 to 7.8±1.5, p=0.21 Wilcoxon Signed Rank test). Between group comparison revealed a statistically significant better PES for the non-augmented group (p=0.01, Mann Whitney U test) but no statistical significant different WES (p=0.30, Mann Whitney U test). Mean patient satisfaction was rated at 92.1±7.8 on a 0-100 VAS scale and comparable between augmented and non-augmented subjects (p=0.92, Mann Whitney U test). Table 5. Aesthetic evaluation by means of PES and WES score, and patient satisfaction outcome of a questionnaire and a 0-100 VAS-scale, 5 years after crown placement (T 60 ) (n=50). Total score mean± SD % score ≥6 PES 6.6±1.7 74% WES 7.8±1.5 92% Overall VAS score 73.1±7.4 Patient satisfaction N of satisfied patients † % satisfied patients of total Colour of the crown 46 92.0% Form of the crown 46 92.0% Colour of the mucosa 41 82.0% Form of the mucosa 36 72.0% Overall VAS score 92.1±7.8 † = Measured on a 5-point scale. Score 4 and 5 denote ‘satisfied’ and ‘very satisfied’, respectively, and were found acceptable.