ArticleJournal of Indian Prosthodontic Society
Patient acceptability of a wheel chair recliner developed to perform dental procedures at wheelchair itself: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancing Geriatric Dental Education: A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators in Undergraduate Curricula.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Transfer from a wheelchair and discomfort in dental chair are two important barriers for access to dental care among wheelchair-bound patients. The authors have devised an automated wheelchair recliner that helps to mimic the dental chair functioning at wheelchair itself. The aim of this study was to analyze the performance and acceptability of wheelchair recliner among wheelchair-bound patients. Settings and Design: Tertiary care settings, cross-sectional design. Materials and Methods: A total of 100 wheelchair-bound adult patients (aged >21 years) were evaluated for acceptability of the recliner. The patients were assessed using eight-item covering patient comfort/acceptability related to positioning, reclining, repositioning, fear of falls, joy, discomfort, perception regarding dentist's discomfort, and use in future on a scale of 0-4 with 0 indicating least satisfying and four indicating most satisfying experience. Overall, patient experience was graded as poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent. The Chi-square test was used to compare the results. Statistical Analysis Used: IBM Stats package 21.0 was used. Mean ± standard deviation, Numbers/percentages and Chi-square test were used to compare results. The confidence level of the study was 95%. Results: The age of patients ranged from 22 to 83 years (mean age 52.26 ± 18.58 years). Majority were males (58%) and had temporary (60%) disability. On a 4-point scale, the mean scores of patients ranged from 2.47 ± 1.23 (positioning) to 3.40 ± 0.74 (intent to use in future). Overall experience was rated as good to very good by 77% of patients. No significant association of age, sex, or type of disability was seen with overall patient experience. Conclusion: The acceptability rates were good to very good among wheelchair-bound patients and were unaffected by their age, sex, and type of disability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.