Therapeutic choice in the prosthesis: factors inherent to the patient

Introduction: The choice of the therapeutic solution in the prosthesis is brieflyexplored field. The purpose of this study is to emphasize on factors influencing and guiding the patients towards a specific therapeutic option. Material and Methods: An epidemiological study has been achieved within the Prosthodontic Departments of University Hospital Center Ibn Rochd. It included all patients aged 18 years old and more treated in these departments during two months. The statistical methods used are descriptive. Results: The sample studied included 172 patients hosted during the study period with a male / female ratio 0,56.The factors identified as influencing the patient’s choice of the therapy were: The functional rendering for 64% of the patients, the practitioner’s opinion for 59.3%, the increase in self confidence with the prosthesis for 55.8%; the position of the teeth to be restored for 53.5%; the aesthetic rendering for 52.9%; the cost of the treatment for 51.2%; the desire to have a radical solution for 46.5% and the desire to have a fixed device for 41.9%. Regarding the type of the prosthesis performed; these same factors are found, but in a different order of priority. Discussion: The functional rendering represented the major choice criterion for a removable or fixed prosthesis in this studied population as a whole. The main place of the practitioner’s opinion could simply reveal the great confidence that the patients had towards their practitioner to guide them towards the best therapeutic choice. Although the cost factor was the sixth factor of choice, it influenced both the patient and the practitioner in this prosthetic therapeutic decision-making. Given that in our background, the socio-economic level of the sample is still limited and the majority of the cost of the prosthetic care are provided by a free medical cover called the medical assistance plan or RAMED, based on the principles of social assistance and national solidarity for the benefit of needy population. Conclusion: The shared decision-making should take into account both the practitioner’s therapeutic proposals and the aforementioned prosthetic choice factors inherent in the patients. This is part of the permanent apprehension for an improvement in the acceptance and the satisfaction of the prosthetic result by the patient.