Assessment of oral health-related quality of life outcomes: A preliminary study to compare conventional and digital impressions in obturator fabrication for patients with maxillectomy defects.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) as measured by the University of Washington Quality of Life Scale Version 4 (UW-QOL v4) among patients with maxillectomy defects resulting from COVID-19-associated mucormycosis (CAM). The comparison focused on patients whose maxillary obturators were fabricated using conventional or digital impression techniques. METHODS: Twenty patients with maxillary defects requiring oral rehabilitation with obturators were alternately assigned to two groups. Conventional impressions using stone models were taken for the Control Group, while digital impressions with 3D-printed models were used for the Test Group. For both groups, changes in OHRQoL were assessed using the UW-QOL v4 at baseline and three months post-prosthesis insertion. Nominal variables were summarised as counts and percentages, while numerical variables were expressed as means with standard deviations. The normality criterion was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The distribution of variables and score comparisons between the digital and conventional methods were analysed using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test for numerical variables and the Chi-square or Fisher's Exact test, as appropriate, for nominal variables. RESULTS: Before rehabilitation, low scores were observed across all domains of the UW-QOL v4 in both participant groups. For the Control Group, the most affected domains were chewing [0.0 (0.0)], taste [6.0 (12.6)], and swallowing [9.0 (14.5)]. Meanwhile, in the Test Group, the most affected domains were taste [13.0 (23.6)] and speech [18.0 (15.5)]. Post-rehabilitation, significant improvements were noted across all domains of the UW-QOL v4, with mean scores exceeding 80 in most domains for both groups. Specifically, physical subscale scores increased from 22.5 (6.3) to 85.8 (8.9) in the Control Group, and from 29.5 (10.7) to 85.5 (14.0) in the Test Group. Similarly, social subscale scores rose from 37.3 (14.9) to 90.2 (12.4) in the Control Group, and from 33.1 (18.9) to 88.0 (10.7) in the Test Group. However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in post-rehabilitation outcomes across all UW-QOL v4 domains (P > 0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Speech was the common domain of concern for both groups of participants before rehabilitation. A comparison between conventional and digital impressions for the fabrication of obturators in patients with maxillectomy defects due to CAM revealed no statistically significant differences in the distribution of scores across various domains of the UW-QOL v4 (P > 0.05 for all comparisons) CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Obturators fabricated using digital impressions are equally effective as those made using conventional impressions for patients with maxillectomy defects. Regardless of the method used to create impressions of the defect, patients experienced significant improvements in clinical outcomes following rehabilitation.