Comparative Assessment of Patient’s Acceptability between Hawley and Vacuum-Formed Retainer in Patients Treated with Fixed Orthodontics Appliance
Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three months. Study Design: Quasi-experimental study. Place and Duration of Study: Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Jan 2019 to Mar...
Saved in:
Published in: | Pakistan Armed Forces medical journal Vol. 73; no. 3; pp. 682 - 85 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Rawalpindi
Knowledge Bylanes
30-06-2023
AsiaNet Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd Army Medical College Rawalpindi |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Abstract | Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three months.
Study Design: Quasi-experimental study.
Place and Duration of Study: Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Jan 2019 to Mar 2020.
Methodology: Eighty-two Patients treated with fixed orthodontics appliances in the department of orthodontics of Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Patient acceptance was evaluated through a ten-question questionnaire regarding biting, fitting, hygiene, speech, swallowing, appearance, selfconfidence, gingival irritation, durability and comfort. Patients were evaluated on a 10cm long Visual analogue scale over three months in the post-orthodontics retention phase, after one week (T1), one month (T2) and three months (T3) of follow-up.
Results: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better in terms of speech (p<0.01), appearance (p<0.001), durability (p<0.001), gingival irritation (p<0.001), swallowing (p<0.001), self-confidence, and comfort (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of fitting, hygiene and biting.
Conclusion: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better accepted in terms of speech, swallowing, appearance, self confidence, durability, gingival irritation and comfort. |
---|---|
AbstractList | ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three months. Study Design: Quasi-experimental study. Place and Duration of Study: Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Jan 2019 to Mar 2020. Methodology: Eighty-two Patients treated with fixed orthodontics appliances in the department of orthodontics of Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Patient acceptance was evaluated through a ten-question questionnaire regarding biting, fitting, hygiene, speech, swallowing, appearance, selfconfidence, gingival irritation, durability and comfort. Patients were evaluated on a 10cm long Visual analogue scale over three months in the post-orthodontics retention phase, after one week (T1), one month (T2) and three months (T3) of follow-up. Results: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better in terms of speech (p<0.01), appearance (p<0.001), durability (p<0.001), gingival irritation (p<0.001), swallowing (p<0.001), self-confidence, and comfort (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of fitting, hygiene and biting. Conclusion: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better accepted in terms of speech, swallowing, appearance, selfconfidence, durability, gingival irritation and comfort. Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three months. Study Design: Quasi-experimental study. Place and Duration of Study: Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Jan 2019 to Mar 2020. Methodology: Eighty-two Patients treated with fixed orthodontics appliances in the department of orthodontics of Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Patient acceptance was evaluated through a ten-question questionnaire regarding biting, fitting, hygiene, speech, swallowing, appearance, selfconfidence, gingival irritation, durability and comfort. Patients were evaluated on a 10cm long Visual analogue scale over three months in the post-orthodontics retention phase, after one week (T1), one month (T2) and three months (T3) of follow-up. Results: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better in terms of speech (p<0.01), appearance (p<0.001), durability (p<0.001), gingival irritation (p<0.001), swallowing (p<0.001), self-confidence, and comfort (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of fitting, hygiene and biting. Conclusion: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better accepted in terms of speech, swallowing, appearance, self confidence, durability, gingival irritation and comfort. Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three months. Study Design: Quasi-experimental study. Place and Duration of Study: Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Jan 2019 to Mar 2020. Methodology: Eighty-two Patients treated with fixed orthodontics appliances in the department of orthodontics of Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Patient acceptance was evaluated through a ten-question questionnaire regarding biting, fitting, hygiene, speech, swallowing, appearance, selfconfidence, gingival irritation, durability and comfort. Patients were evaluated on a 10cm long Visual analogue scale over three months in the post-orthodontics retention phase, after one week (T1), one month (T2) and three months (T3) of follow-up. Results: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better in terms of speech (p<0.01), appearance (p<0.001), durability (p<0.001), gingival irritation (p<0.001), swallowing (p<0.001), self-confidence, and comfort (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of fitting, hygiene and biting. Conclusion: The vacuumed-formed retainer was significantly better accepted in terms of speech, swallowing, appearance, self confidence, durability, gingival irritation and comfort. |
Audience | Academic |
Author | Hameed, Munza Afgan, Nimra Alamzeb, Haseeb Bibi, Khadija Jan, Abdullah Malik, Sundas |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Khadija surname: Bibi fullname: Bibi, Khadija – sequence: 2 givenname: Abdullah surname: Jan fullname: Jan, Abdullah – sequence: 3 givenname: Munza surname: Hameed fullname: Hameed, Munza – sequence: 4 givenname: Nimra surname: Afgan fullname: Afgan, Nimra – sequence: 5 givenname: Haseeb surname: Alamzeb fullname: Alamzeb, Haseeb – sequence: 6 givenname: Sundas surname: Malik fullname: Malik, Sundas |
BookMark | eNptUk1vEzEQXaEiEUp_ADdLnDf4a9e7xygitFKlIlS4WrPecesoay-209Ab_4ETf49fgkn4EBL2waPnN29mNO95deaDx6p6yeiyYbwRr2ew03b5oIQTy1bI_km14JKxuuskP6sWlApa963snlUXKW1pOY3gkjaL6us6TDNEyO4BySolTGlCn0mw5F0BS_j9y7dEVsbgnGFwO5cfyYD5gOjJJRx2-EjAj-QjmP1-qjchTjiS95jBeYzE-d8yidxGhFw-Dy7fk437XMKbmO_DGHx2ptSY550Db_BF9dTCLuHFr_e8-rB5c7u-rK9v3l6tV9e14Urkuh_oyNQwNEiht4idFdZY1XBhBqkkG_sy4lBAzpRi1oiOCoCej61tTE9RnFdXJ90xwFbP0U0QH3UAp49AiHcaYmlth9payQ100IBtpJSm56AUSAEShR0ML1qvTlpzDJ_2mLLehn30pX3NO9F2PZOt-Mu6gyLqvA05gplcMnqlGlW2wlpaWMv_sModcXKmrN66gv-TwE4JJoaUIto_wzCqjw7RR4foo0P0T4eIH0DatKU |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | COPYRIGHT 2023 Knowledge Bylanes (c)2023 Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal |
Copyright_xml | – notice: COPYRIGHT 2023 Knowledge Bylanes – notice: (c)2023 Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION 3V. 7X7 7XB 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BENPR CCPQU DWQXO FYUFA GHDGH K9. M0S PIMPY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI DOA |
DOI | 10.51253/pafmj.v73i3.6349 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef ProQuest Central (Corporate) Health & Medical Complete (ProQuest Database) ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Hospital Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Essentials AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Korea Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition) Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central ProQuest Health & Medical Complete Health Research Premium Collection ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Korea ProQuest One Academic ProQuest Central (Alumni) |
DatabaseTitleList | Publicly Available Content Database CrossRef |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: Directory of Open Access Journals url: http://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 2411-8842 |
EndPage | 85 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_ff42ca8a5af5444c92a77a43a4e3fbc2 A757053160 10_51253_pafmj_v73i3_6349 |
GroupedDBID | 3V. 5VS 7X7 8FI 8FJ AAYXX ABDBF ABUBX ABUWG ACIHN ACMJI ADBBV ADCHZ ADEYR AEAQA AFJDA AFKRA AGFXM AGQRV AHEHV AHHXF AHKOF AHMBA AKNUK ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS BAI BAW BCNDV BENPR BKOMP BPHCQ BVXVI CCPQU CITATION EIS EMI EOJEC ESX FAC FYUFA GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 HMCUK IAO IMI ITC IWA LGEZI LOTEE LXO LXU MV. M~E NADUK NFBOU NKUNM NXXTH NYMDV OBODZ OK1 P6G PIMPY PQQKQ PROAC PV9 RXW RZL TAA TR2 UKHRP UNMZH USXSC ~ZZ 7XB 8FK AZQEC DWQXO K9. PQEST PQUKI |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c273t-9b0d17bb5e0a9fee8f3fcf7523cb4741d9240bf3f21771fc3803aa92d6f5c90e3 |
IEDL.DBID | DOA |
ISSN | 0030-9648 |
IngestDate | Tue Oct 22 15:15:17 EDT 2024 Fri Nov 08 21:34:38 EST 2024 Tue Nov 19 21:05:40 EST 2024 Tue Nov 12 23:25:57 EST 2024 Fri Aug 23 01:43:01 EDT 2024 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 3 |
Language | English |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c273t-9b0d17bb5e0a9fee8f3fcf7523cb4741d9240bf3f21771fc3803aa92d6f5c90e3 |
OpenAccessLink | https://doaj.org/article/ff42ca8a5af5444c92a77a43a4e3fbc2 |
PQID | 2836891463 |
PQPubID | 616524 |
PageCount | -596 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_ff42ca8a5af5444c92a77a43a4e3fbc2 proquest_journals_2836891463 gale_infotracmisc_A757053160 gale_infotracacademiconefile_A757053160 crossref_primary_10_51253_pafmj_v73i3_6349 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 20230630 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2023-06-30 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 06 year: 2023 text: 20230630 day: 30 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | Rawalpindi |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Rawalpindi |
PublicationTitle | Pakistan Armed Forces medical journal |
PublicationYear | 2023 |
Publisher | Knowledge Bylanes AsiaNet Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd Army Medical College Rawalpindi |
Publisher_xml | – name: Knowledge Bylanes – name: AsiaNet Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd – name: Army Medical College Rawalpindi |
SSID | ssj0000532405 |
Score | 2.2763145 |
Snippet | Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three months.
Study... ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three... Objective: To compare the acceptability of Vacuum-formed Retainers and Hawley Retainers in two groups of fixed orthodontics patients over three months. Study... |
SourceID | doaj proquest gale crossref |
SourceType | Open Website Aggregation Database |
StartPage | 682 |
SubjectTerms | Comparative analysis Confidence Laboratories Malaligned teeth Oral hygiene Orthodontics Patient compliance Patients Quasi-experimental methods Questionnaires Relapse Retainers Retention Speech Swallowing Teeth |
Title | Comparative Assessment of Patient’s Acceptability between Hawley and Vacuum-Formed Retainer in Patients Treated with Fixed Orthodontics Appliance |
URI | https://www.proquest.com/docview/2836891463 https://doaj.org/article/ff42ca8a5af5444c92a77a43a4e3fbc2 |
Volume | 73 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://sdu.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1LixQxEA66B_EiPnF0lRwEQchu7yTpJMdx3WEuPtBVvIXqPGCE7Vnm4ePmf_Dk3_OXWJX0jLsH8eKtSUITUq-vOtVfMfYEgzqGxZQE6KiFstEKmx0ICVp3BudsoV2cvTOvPtoXJ0STs2v1RTVhlR64HtxhzmocwIKGrJVSwY3BGFASVJK5C9X7NvZCMlVZvYlorrYvkI1wrbL1ShPjm5aH55DPPh18NnIuD1pJPJoXglLh7v-bhy5hZ3qT3RjwIp_Ufd5iV1J_m117OdyI32E_jv_Qd_PJjmaTLzJ_UylTf33_ueKTQOUrlZP7Gx-Ks_gMvqBP4NBH_gHCZnMmpghhU-RvqbC0T0s-77evWfFTwpc4SZ9u-XT-FR9fL6n_9KInrmdeAC0p0V32fnpyejwTQ6MFERC9rIXrmnhkuk6nBlxOyWaZQzaYo4ZOIeSImKQ1HQ5i_mKOcpC2kQBuHNusg2uSvMf2-kWf7jNudDQ6QVYBDT11DpfFOM7JgVOA4GzEnm1P2p9XPg2PeUgRiy9i8UUsnsQyYs9JFruFRIVdBlBB_KAg_l8KMmJPSZKeDHa9hADDfwe4X6K-8hOjDXmithmx_Usr0dDC5emtLvjB0Fce0VlrHYYb-eB_bPYhu0797GtB4j7bWy836RG7uoqbx0XBfwNsDwLa |
link.rule.ids | 315,782,786,866,2108,27935,27936 |
linkProvider | Directory of Open Access Journals |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative+Assessment+of+Patient%27s+Acceptability+between+Hawley+and+Vacuum-Formed+Retainer+in+Patients+Treated+with+Fixed+Orthodontics+Appliance&rft.jtitle=Pakistan+Armed+Forces+medical+journal&rft.au=Bibi%2C+Khadija&rft.au=Abdullah%2C+Jan&rft.au=Hameed%2C+Munza&rft.au=Afgan%2C+Nimra&rft.date=2023-06-30&rft.pub=AsiaNet+Pakistan+%28Pvt%29+Ltd&rft.issn=0030-9648&rft.eissn=2411-8842&rft.volume=73&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=682&rft_id=info:doi/10.51253%2Fpafmj.v73i3.6349&rft.externalDBID=HAS_PDF_LINK |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0030-9648&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0030-9648&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0030-9648&client=summon |