Impacts of Orthognathic Surgery on Patient Satisfaction, Overall Quality of Life, and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life: A Systematic Literature Review

Table 4

Results for the global and domain scores on the OHIP-14 ().

Study design	Follow-up duration	Main results	References
(1) Prospective	T0: baseline; T1: 6 weeks after surgery; T2: 6 months after surgery	T0-T1: no significant difference in the global score 6 weeks after orthognathic surgery. However, a significant increase was observed for the score on the domain functional limitation and significant decreases were observed for the scores on the domains psychological discomfort and psychological disability.; T0–T2: significant reductions in the global score and in all 7 domain scores.	Lee et al. [9]
(2) Prospective	T0: baseline; T1: 6 weeks after surgery; T2: 6 months after surgery; T3: after orthodontic treatment (at least 12 months after orthognathic surgery and 6 months after the end of orthodontic treatment)	T0-T1: no significant changes in the global score. Significant reductions in the scores on the domains functional limitation and psychological discomfort 6 weeks after surgery.; T0–T2: significant reductions in the global score and in all 7 domain scores.; T0–T3: significant reductions in the global score and in all 7 domain scores.	Choi et al. [3]
(3) Prospective	12 months after surgery	Significant reductions in scores on the domains psychological discomfort, dissatisfaction with esthetics and social disability.	Rustemeyer et al. [22]
(4) Prospective	8.3 months after surgery	Significant reductions in scores on the domains psychological discomfort and social disability after surgery.	Rustemeyer and Gregersen [25]
(5) Prospective	T0: 1 week before surgery; T1: 1 month after surgery; T2: 3 months after surgery	Significant differences in all scores (global and domains) at all postsurgery time points; the scores increased 1 month after surgery and substantially decreased 3 months after surgery.	Corso et al. [30]
(6) Prospective	T0: before treatment; T1: before surgery; T2: 6 months after surgery; T3: 12 months after removal of orthodontic appliance	Domain functional limitation: Class II: the global score increased at T1 (22.84 ± 3.40) compared to that at T0 (19.18 ± 2.97) but significantly decreased at T2 (8.64 ± 3.21) and T3 (6.87 ± 2.11) ().; The scores on all the domains decreased at T2 and T3.; Class III: reduction in the global score at T1 (17.63 ± 3.83), T2 (6.71 ± 2.45) and T3 (6.24 ± 2.66) compared to that at T0 (19.86 ± 2.57) (); The scores on all the domains decreased at T2 and T3.; Differences between groups were significant at T1 () and T2 ().	Baherimoghaddam et al. [33]
(7) Prospective	T0: before surgery; T1: 6 weeks after surgery; T2: 6 months after surgery	Significant reductions in OHIP-14 scores at T1 and T2 compared to those of the controls.	Silva et al. [35]
(8) Retrospective	T0: 1 month before surgery; T1: 6 months after surgery	The scores for social disability, physical pain, psychological discomfort and dissatisfaction with esthetics significantly decreased after surgery in both groups.; Bimaxillary osteotomy group: social disability T0: 0.94 ± 1.22, T1: 0.38 ± 0.81; physical pain T0: 1.17 ± 1.16, T1: 0.67 ± 0.72; psychological discomfort T0: 1.55 ± 1.03, T1: 1.19 ± 1.41; dissatisfaction with esthetics T0: 2.83 ± 1.13, T1: 1.89 ± 0.99.; Bimaxillary osteotomy with genioplasty group: social disability T0: 1.33 ± 1.39, T1: 0.37 ± 0.53; physical pain T0: 1.29 ± 1.01, T1: 0.78 ± 0.75; psychological discomfort T0: 2.02 ± 1.05, T1: 0.74 ± 0.59; dissatisfaction with esthetics T0: 2.73 ± 1.14, T1: 0.41 ± 0.48.; The domains psychological discomfort and dissatisfaction with esthetics exhibited significant differences favoring the bimaxillary osteotomy with genioplasty group.	Rustemeyer and Lehmann [27]
(9) Prospective	T0: before surgery; T1: 4–6 months after surgery	Significant reduction in the global score from T0 (13.23 ± 6.45) to T1 (3.26 ± 4.19) ().; Significant reductions in all domain scores at T1 ().	Göelzer et al. [5]
(10) Retrospective	T0: before surgery; T1: 2 years after surgery	Significant reductions in the global score (T0: 14/T1: 4.68) and all domain scores ().	Wee and Poon [28]
(11) Prospective	T1: before surgery; T2: 1 month after surgery; T3: 6 months after treatment; T4: 12 months after treatment T5: 18 months after treatment T6: after the end of orthodontic-surgical treatment	The quality of life of the surgery-first group significantly increased at T2 compared to that at T1, but no difference was found from T4 to T6.; In the group subjected to conventional treatment, quality of life declined until T3 but in a nonsignificant manner; then, it significantly improved ().	Huang et al. [38]
(12) Prospective	T0: before bracket placement; T1: 1 month before surgery; T2: 1 month after surgery	No significant difference was found between groups at T0 (surgery-first: 16 ± 6/conventional: 13 ± 5) or T2 (surgery-first: 2 ± 1/conventional: 3 ± 1). Significant differences were found in each group among T0, T1 and T2 ().; A significant difference was found in the conventional treatment group between T0 and T1 ().	Pelo et al. [39]