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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Pakistan Armed Forces medical journal Vol. 73; no. 3; pp. 682 - 85
Main Authors: Bibi, Khadija, Jan, Abdullah, Hameed, Munza, Afgan, Nimra, Alamzeb, Haseeb, Malik, Sundas
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