-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
The effect of different bonded retainer wires on tooth mobility immediately after orthodontic treatment
J. Kučera, I. Marek, SJ. Littlewood
Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
NLK
Free Medical Journals
od 1996 do Před 1 rokem
Open Access Digital Library
od 1996-01-01
PubMed
34374751
DOI
10.1093/ejo/cjab038
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- fixní ortodontický aparát MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- ortodontické přístroje - design MeSH
- ortodontické retainery škodlivé účinky MeSH
- řezáky MeSH
- viklavost zubů * etiologie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the immediate influence of four commonly used retainer wires on tooth mobility following orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty patients after orthodontic treatment were assigned to four study groups (n = 20 in each group). Groups were provided with directly bonded fixed retainers-0.0150′′ (group A), 0.0175′′ (group B), 0.016 × 0.022′′ (group C), and 0.0215′′ (group D). Tooth mobility was measured using the Periotest device at two times-after removal of fixed appliance (T1) and after bonding of the retainer (T2). Values of tooth mobility, 'Periotest values', were analysed between groups and compared with the physiologic tooth mobility in a control group of untreated patients (n = 65). Kruskal-Wallis H, Mann-Whitney U, Dunn's test, Fisher's exact test, and binary logistic regression tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Tooth mobility after orthodontic treatment was significantly increased. While canines remained within normal range of tooth mobility, values for incisors increased on average to the first degree of tooth mobility (slight mobility). Logistic regression analysis identified age as a significant predictor for increased tooth mobility (P = 0.032) with odds ratio 1.065 (95% CI 1.005-1.128), with mobility increasing with age. After bonding of the retainer in all four groups, the tooth mobility was reduced to values which were not significantly different form normal physiological values found in the control group (P > 0.05). There were no differences in the amount of change or in tooth mobility values at T2 between the different types of bonded retainers. LIMITATIONS: Age of subjects in the control group was significantly higher than that in the study groups. An alternation method was used instead of randomization to distribute the four different types of retainers. CONCLUSIONS: All of the retainer wires were able to successfully reduce the increased tooth mobility caused by orthodontic treatment to normal levels. The values of tooth mobility after placement of retainers were within the range of physiologic tooth mobility.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22019094
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20220804135344.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 220720s2022 xxk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1093/ejo/cjab038 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)34374751
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxk
- 100 1_
- $a Kučera, Josef $u Department of Orthodontics, Clinic of Dental Medicine, First Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000344472467
- 245 14
- $a The effect of different bonded retainer wires on tooth mobility immediately after orthodontic treatment / $c J. Kučera, I. Marek, SJ. Littlewood
- 520 9_
- $a OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the immediate influence of four commonly used retainer wires on tooth mobility following orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty patients after orthodontic treatment were assigned to four study groups (n = 20 in each group). Groups were provided with directly bonded fixed retainers-0.0150′′ (group A), 0.0175′′ (group B), 0.016 × 0.022′′ (group C), and 0.0215′′ (group D). Tooth mobility was measured using the Periotest device at two times-after removal of fixed appliance (T1) and after bonding of the retainer (T2). Values of tooth mobility, 'Periotest values', were analysed between groups and compared with the physiologic tooth mobility in a control group of untreated patients (n = 65). Kruskal-Wallis H, Mann-Whitney U, Dunn's test, Fisher's exact test, and binary logistic regression tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Tooth mobility after orthodontic treatment was significantly increased. While canines remained within normal range of tooth mobility, values for incisors increased on average to the first degree of tooth mobility (slight mobility). Logistic regression analysis identified age as a significant predictor for increased tooth mobility (P = 0.032) with odds ratio 1.065 (95% CI 1.005-1.128), with mobility increasing with age. After bonding of the retainer in all four groups, the tooth mobility was reduced to values which were not significantly different form normal physiological values found in the control group (P > 0.05). There were no differences in the amount of change or in tooth mobility values at T2 between the different types of bonded retainers. LIMITATIONS: Age of subjects in the control group was significantly higher than that in the study groups. An alternation method was used instead of randomization to distribute the four different types of retainers. CONCLUSIONS: All of the retainer wires were able to successfully reduce the increased tooth mobility caused by orthodontic treatment to normal levels. The values of tooth mobility after placement of retainers were within the range of physiologic tooth mobility.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a řezáky $7 D007180
- 650 _2
- $a ortodontické přístroje - design $7 D016382
- 650 _2
- $a fixní ortodontický aparát $7 D000077744
- 650 _2
- $a ortodontické retainery $x škodlivé účinky $7 D018704
- 650 12
- $a viklavost zubů $x etiologie $7 D014086
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Marek, Ivo $u Department of Orthodontics, Clinic of Dental Medicine, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Littlewood, Simon J $u Department of Orthodontics, St Luke's Hospital, Bradford, UK $1 https://orcid.org/0000000290926688
- 773 0_
- $w MED00001634 $t European journal of orthodontics $x 1460-2210 $g Roč. 44, č. 2 (2022), s. 178-186
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34374751 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20220720 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20220804135338 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1822627 $s 1170337
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2022 $b 44 $c 2 $d 178-186 $e 20220330 $i 1460-2210 $m European journal of orthodontics $n Eur J Orthod $x MED00001634
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20220720