A feasible method to improve adherence of&amp;nbsp;Hawley retainer in adolescent orthodontic patients: a randomized controlled trial

Lin, Feiou; Sun, Hao; Ni, Zhenyu; Zheng, Min-ling; Yao, Linjie

doi:10.2147/ppa.s94111

Cited by 28 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…13,23 Comfort is extremely important since it was stated by 28% of the patients as the main reason not to wear the retainers. 18,24 Despite no significant difference in comfort between the appliances, 17.14% of the patients preferred one of the aforementioned retainer types, based on comfort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Level of Satisfaction in the Use of the Wraparound Hawley and Thermoplastic Maxillary Retainers

Chagas¹,

Freitas²,

Cançado³

et al. 2019

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the level of satisfaction in the use of wraparound Hawley and thermoplastic maxillary retainers. Materials and Methods: The study sample included 70 orthodontic patients (24 males and 46 females), who were in the retention stage (mean age = 20.80 years). All patients wore the two types of maxillary retainer for 1 month each, along with a 3×3 fixed mandibular retainer. After the use of each retainer, the patients responded to a questionnaire evaluating the level of satisfaction with their use of the maxillary retainer. Intergroup comparison was performed by independent t tests. Chi-square test was used to evaluate preference for the type of retainer by gender. Results: The thermoplastic retainer was better for swallowing and the wraparound Hawley appliance was better for hygiene and durability. The other factors evaluated (adaptation, speech, comfort, esthetics, satisfaction, and fitting) did not show significant differences between the retainers. There was also no significant difference in preference for the appliances. Conclusions: Regarding the overall satisfaction and the preference, there was no difference between the wraparound Hawley and thermoplastic retainers. The wraparound Hawley appliance was better in hygiene and resistance than the thermoplastic retainer; and the thermoplastic appliance was better than the wraparound Hawley for swallowing fluids and saliva.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Level of Satisfaction in the Use of the Wraparound Hawley and Thermoplastic Maxillary Retainers

Chagas¹,

Freitas²,

Cançado³

et al. 2019

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2,18,25,28,29 Therefore, in the literature from different decades reports can be found stating that esthetic impairment caused by malocclusion, as well as the caregivers' low rating of their child's occlusion support better cooperation during orthodontic therapy. [30][31][32] According to Lin et al, 29 even the visual presentation of post-treatment esthetics deterioration and the ensuing non-cooperation during retention phase seems to increase patients' discipline with regard to wearing their Hawley's retainers. However, assessment of the virtual compliance in the quoted papers remains in a sphere of speculation due to lack of evidence, contrary to our findings (Table 2) based on reliable, objective measurements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have not proven, however, that there is a cause and effect relationship between these phenomena. Nonetheless, on the basis of the available literature on the subject, [13][14][15][16][17][18][29][30][31][32][33][34] it is well-founded to advocate the existence of such a dependence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-perception of smile attractiveness as a reliable predictor of increased patient compliance with an orthodontist

Sarul¹,

Antoszewska-Smith²,

Park³

2019

Adv Clin Exp Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Predicting the cooperation of orthodontic patients seems to be of the utmost importance for successful results in treatment with removable appliances, especially if their cost is to be covered from public funding. Therefore, the issue of unbiased pre-treatment assessment of cooperation still calls for an investigation. Objectives. The objective of this study was to check whether smile attractiveness and its importance, subjectively evaluated by the patients/their caregivers, are reliable predictors of a patient's compliance during treatment with removable appliances. Material and methods. The study group comprised 97 patients aged 9-12 years, treated with active plates or twin-blocks, equipped with the TheraMon ® system. Before treatment, the caregivers and the patients filled out the questionnaires ranking both of the investigated variables. After 9 months of treatment, we analyzed the correlations of the daily wear time (DWT) and other variables. Results. The analysis revealed the following: no relevance of the DWT to the type of removable appliances; negative correlation between the DWT and smile attractiveness assessed by the children and their caregivers; evidently elongated DWT (up to 9.68 h in children), who, together with the caregivers, evaluated their smile attractiveness as poor; coherence of children's and their caregivers' responses evaluating smile attractiveness and its importance, as well as the lack of consistency when comparing responses provided separately by the children and their caregivers. Conclusions. Application of the TheraMon ® sensors objectively proved that the patient's smile attractiveness ranked subjectively as low predicts the orthodontic patient's irreproachable cooperation. Therefore, our easy-to-use questionnaire calls for changing the protocol regarding the wearing time of removable appliances during treatment and introducing an evidence-based policy of reimbursement for such therapy from public funds. Further investigation of the effectiveness of removable appliances worn shorter than previously presumed and of the motivation to continue treatment, once smile attractiveness has been improved, is necessary.

show abstract

“…In addition to photopolymerization, heat cure is used in dentistry to increase the polymerization conversion and enhance the mechanical properties. Heat-cured resins are commonly used in orthodontics for making complicated functional appliances to correct severe skeletal class II and III malocclusions of preadolescent patients and for fabricating retainers to keep the esthetic results of orthodontic treatment [1,67,68]. The complex designing of appliances and retainers may prevent effective cleaning, thus inducing caries, periodontal diseases, and even denture-induced stomatitis in acrylate resin wearers [1,69,70].…”

Section: Protein-repellent and Antibacterial Pmma Resin To Suppress Bmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel Protein-Repellent and Antibacterial Resins and Cements to Inhibit Lesions and Protect Teeth

Cao

Zhang

et al. 2019

International Journal of Polymer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orthodontic treatment is increasingly popular as people worldwide seek esthetics and better quality of life. In orthodontic treatment, complex appliances and retainers are placed in the patients’ mouths for at least one year, which often lead to biofilm plaque accumulation. This in turn increases the caries-inducing bacteria, decreases the pH of the retained plaque on an enamel surface, and causes white spot lesions (WSLs) in enamel. This article reviews the cutting-edge research on a new class of bioactive and therapeutic dental resins, cements, and adhesives that can inhibit biofilms and protect tooth structures. The novel approaches include the use of protein-repellent and anticaries polymeric dental cements containing 2-methacryloyloxyethyl phosphorylcholine (MPC) and dimethylaminododecyl methacrylate (DMAHDM); multifunctional resins that can inhibit enamel demineralization; protein-repellent and self-etching adhesives to greatly reduce oral biofilm growth; and novel polymethyl methacrylate resins to suppress oral biofilms and acid production. These new materials could reduce biofilm attachment, raise local biofilm pH, and facilitate the remineralization to protect the teeth. This novel class of dental resin with dual benefits of antibacterial and protein-repellent capabilities has the potential for a wide range of dental and biomedical applications to inhibit bacterial infection and protect the tissues.

show abstract

A feasible method to improve adherence of Hawley retainer in adolescent orthodontic patients: a randomized controlled trial

Cited by 28 publications

References 32 publications

Level of Satisfaction in the Use of the Wraparound Hawley and Thermoplastic Maxillary Retainers

Level of Satisfaction in the Use of the Wraparound Hawley and Thermoplastic Maxillary Retainers

Self-perception of smile attractiveness as a reliable predictor of increased patient compliance with an orthodontist

Novel Protein-Repellent and Antibacterial Resins and Cements to Inhibit Lesions and Protect Teeth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About