Abstract:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate patients’ pain levels during four different debonding procedures. The null hypothesis was that the pain perception of the patients undergoing four different debonding applications was not statistically significant different.Material and MethodsOne hundred and twenty orthodontic patients who underwent orthodontic debonding were included in this study. The patients were randomly divided into 4 groups according to technique used in the patients. Debonding groups were… Show more
“…There have been similar studies conducted across other regions involving various debonding methods in which anxiety scores across different genders have not turned out significantly different [ 34 ]. The patients' attitude towards pain depends on varied conditions such as using different hand instruments at debonding, cultural background, intake of analgesics, the periodontal condition of teeth, practitioner's experience, and position of patient and practitioner; the relation of all these parameters to pain perception can be the matter of further study.…”
Introduction. Patients experience various levels of discomfort during orthodontic treatment, i.e., after placement of separators, orthodontic implant placement, and archwire placement and during debonding. Various pain control methods have been developed to relive pain during debonding, i.e., finger pressure (FP), elastomeric wafer (EW), and stress relief (SR). Aim. To analyse various pain scales commonly used to determine the effect of different pain control methods during debonding of orthodontic brackets. Study Design. A comparative cross-sectional study performed on a sample of 60 patients (n = 60) including 14 males and 46 females who were ready for debonding and who were divided into three groups, i.e., finger pressure (FP), elastomeric wafer (EW), and stress relief (SR). Materials and Methods. A 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to record the pain intensity for each tooth. Another scale known as Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) was used to evaluate the patient’s general attitude towards pain perception. The armamentarium and operator were kept same for all the patients. Statistical analysis used was the Kruskal–Wallis test, used for intergroup and intragroup comparison of pain scores. Results. Lowest total pain score was recorded in the FP group (
P
=
0.043
) on intergroup comparison, while on intragroup comparison, higher pain scores were recorded in lower anterior region (
P
=
0.02
) in all three groups. There was no significant difference between the pain scores reported by the male and female subjects. Conclusion. FP is an effective method of pain control. And teeth in the anterior region of lower and upper arches are more sensitive to pain. In terms of cognitive-affective constructs, although the VAS has been widely used in previous studies, the PCS has been detailed to show the most reliable association with physical discomfort and emotional distress.
“…There have been similar studies conducted across other regions involving various debonding methods in which anxiety scores across different genders have not turned out significantly different [ 34 ]. The patients' attitude towards pain depends on varied conditions such as using different hand instruments at debonding, cultural background, intake of analgesics, the periodontal condition of teeth, practitioner's experience, and position of patient and practitioner; the relation of all these parameters to pain perception can be the matter of further study.…”
Introduction. Patients experience various levels of discomfort during orthodontic treatment, i.e., after placement of separators, orthodontic implant placement, and archwire placement and during debonding. Various pain control methods have been developed to relive pain during debonding, i.e., finger pressure (FP), elastomeric wafer (EW), and stress relief (SR). Aim. To analyse various pain scales commonly used to determine the effect of different pain control methods during debonding of orthodontic brackets. Study Design. A comparative cross-sectional study performed on a sample of 60 patients (n = 60) including 14 males and 46 females who were ready for debonding and who were divided into three groups, i.e., finger pressure (FP), elastomeric wafer (EW), and stress relief (SR). Materials and Methods. A 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to record the pain intensity for each tooth. Another scale known as Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) was used to evaluate the patient’s general attitude towards pain perception. The armamentarium and operator were kept same for all the patients. Statistical analysis used was the Kruskal–Wallis test, used for intergroup and intragroup comparison of pain scores. Results. Lowest total pain score was recorded in the FP group (
P
=
0.043
) on intergroup comparison, while on intragroup comparison, higher pain scores were recorded in lower anterior region (
P
=
0.02
) in all three groups. There was no significant difference between the pain scores reported by the male and female subjects. Conclusion. FP is an effective method of pain control. And teeth in the anterior region of lower and upper arches are more sensitive to pain. In terms of cognitive-affective constructs, although the VAS has been widely used in previous studies, the PCS has been detailed to show the most reliable association with physical discomfort and emotional distress.
“…Diskomforto pojūtis šios procedūros metu priklauso nuo dviejų pagrindinių dalykų: danties paslankumo ir jėgos tipo. Periodonto struktūrų išsidėstymas leidžia atsispirti intruzinėms kramtymo jėgoms, todėl intruzinės jėgos panaudojimas nuimant breketus sukelia mažiau skausmo, lyginant su mezialinėmis, distalinėmis, facialinėmis, lingvalinėmis ar ekstruzinėmis jėgomis [4,10]. Gydytojai ortodontai, norėdami sumažinti diskomfortą breketų nuėmimo metu, turėtų stabilizuoti dantis pirštu arba paprašyti paciento sukąsti vatos volelį [10].…”
Skausmas ir diskomfortas yra dažni nepageidaujami, tačiau laikini ortodontinio gydymo reiškiniai. Tyrimų duomenimis, ortodontinio gydymo metu skausmą patiria 72-100 proc. pacientų. Be skausmo, pacientai gali jausti kitus nemalonius pojūčius burnoje ar socialinį diskomfortą. Skausmas ir diskomfortas yra subjektyvūs pojūčiai, priklausantys ir nuo paciento psichosocialinių aplinkybių. Skausmas dažniausiai prasideda praėjus kelioms valandoms po breketų užklijavimo ir būna intensyviausias po 24 valandų. Skausmo pojūtis mažėja 3-7 dieną, kol visiškai stabilizuojasi, praėjus mėnesiui. Ortodontinis skausmas (diskomfortas) dažniausiai nedidelis ir trunka neilgai. Kai kuriems pacientams skausmas būna intensyvesnis, gali trukdyti kasdienei veiklai, tačiau dažniausiai – tik gydymo pradžioje. Ortodontinis skausmas turi uždegiminių savybių, todėl net ir didėjant susidomėjimui nefarmakologinėmis skausmo valdymo strategijomis, efektyviausiai ortodontinis skausmas malšinamas tik vartojant vaistus nuo skausmo.
Šiame straipsnyje apžvelgiama ortodontinio skausmo etiologija, skausmo ir diskomforto priklausomybė nuo paciento individualių savybių, nemalonių pojūčių įtaka gyvenimo kokybei bei skausmo valdymo strategijos.
“…10 In the existing literature, there are just a few articles that investigate the effects of techniques that provide an intrusive force on the teeth. [11][12][13] A systematic review, published in 2019 by Almuzian et al, was able to present just two studies related to providing intrusive force. [10][11][12] As a result of our research, we were able to access one additional article published recently.…”
Introduction: Debonding pain is an unpleasant sensation that is frequently encountered during debonding procedure.
Aim of the study: To investigate the effectiveness of cotton roll-biting on pain caused by the debonding procedure.
Materials and methods: 102 patients (61 females, 41 males) who were at the debonding stage in orthodontic treatment were included in the research. The study was planned using a split-mouth design: one side of the jaw was the study, and the other side was the control. The anxiety level of participants was measured before debonding. On the study side, debonding was performed while patients were biting a cotton roll. On the control side, debonding was implemented as a routine debonding procedure. Study and control sides were assigned differently in each successive patient. The debonding pain of each tooth was recorded using the Visual Analog Scale prepared separately for each tooth. Shapiro–Wilk and Mann–Whitney U tests were used for statistical analysis. For both gender groups, patients were sequenced according to the average amount of pain per tooth. Subsequently, statistical analysis was repeated by using 50% of patients suffering more pain.
Results: In the lower second premolar tooth, a statistically significant difference was detected. Pain scores were statistically higher in the study side for this tooth. No statistically significant differences were found for all other teeth.
Conclusions: Cotton roll-biting has no alleviating effect on debonding pain. When debonding is performed gently using a squeezing action without applying torsional forces, additional pain relief methods are not required.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.