Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters








Year range
1.
Braz. oral res. (Online) ; 33: e078, 2019. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1019603

ABSTRACT

Abstract The aim of this study was to assess, correlate, and compare users' perceptions and preference related to maxillary removable retainers. Volunteers were recruited to use four retainer types: conventional wrap-around (CWA), wrap-around with an anterior opening (OWA), "U" wrap-around (UWA), and clear thermoplastic retainer (CT). The main outcomes were the volunteers' perceptions, evaluated with a 100-mm visual analogue scale, and their preferred retainer. The retainers were used for 21 days each (washout intervals of 7 days). Nineteen volunteers (27 ± 4.53 years) were randomly divided into four groups that used the four retainers, but with a different sequence. Perceptions were evaluated immediately after the use of each retainer and the preference at the end of the research. Repeated measures ANOVA and Friedman tests with post-hoc Tukey's test (intergroup comparisons), and Pearson and Spearman analyses (correlations between perceptions) were applied. The WA retainers did not significantly differ among themselves. The CT was rated significantly worse in speech (p ≤ 0.001), discomfort (p < 0.001), and occlusal interference (p < 0.001), and did not significantly differ from the others in esthetics. Users preferred significant more the WA retainers in comparison with the CT retainers. The occlusal interference caused by the CT was positively correlated to other perceptions, such as changes in speech and discomfort. WA retainers presented similar preference and perceptions, but were significantly better than the CT. The CT occlusal coverage appeared to be the primary cause of its rejection.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Young Adult , Orthodontic Appliance Design/statistics & numerical data , Orthodontic Retainers/standards , Patient Preference/statistics & numerical data , Reference Values , Analysis of Variance , Treatment Outcome , Statistics, Nonparametric , Cross-Over Studies , Visual Analog Scale , Maxilla
2.
Dental press j. orthod. (Impr.) ; 22(2): 87-94, Mar.-Apr. 2017. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-840227

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION: Subjective facial analysis is a diagnostic method that provides morphological analysis of the face. Thus, the aim of the present study was to compare the facial and dental diagnoses and investigate their relationship. METHODS: This sample consisted of 151 children (7 to 13 years old), without previous orthodontic treatment, analyzed by an orthodontist. Standardized extraoral and intraoral photographs were taken for the subjective facial classification according to Facial Pattern classification and occlusal analyses. It has been researched the occurrence of different Facial Patterns, the relationship between Facial Pattern classification in frontal and profile views, the relationship between Facial Patterns and Angle classification, and between anterior open bite and Long Face Pattern. RESULTS: Facial Pattern I was verified in 64.24% of the children, Pattern II in 21.29%, Pattern III in 6.62%, Long Face Pattern in 5.96% and Short Face Pattern in 1.99%. A substantial strength of agreement of approximately 84% between frontal and profile classification of Facial Pattern was observed (Kappa = 0.69). Agreement between the Angle classification and the Facial Pattern was seen in approximately 63% of the cases (Kappa = 0.27). Long Face Pattern did not present more open bite prevalence. CONCLUSION: Facial Patterns I and II were the most prevalent in children and the less prevalent was the Short Face Pattern. A significant concordance was observed between profile and frontal subjective facial analysis. There was slight concordance between the Facial Pattern and the sagittal dental relationships. The anterior open bite (AOB) was not significantly prevalent in any Facial Pattern.


RESUMO INTRODUÇÃO: a análise facial subjetiva é um método diagnóstico que privilegia a avaliação morfológica da face; assim, o principal objetivo do presente trabalho foi comparar os diagnósticos faciais e dentários e investigar a correlação entre eles. MÉTODOS: a amostra consistiu de 151 crianças (7 a 13 anos de idade), sem nenhum tratamento ortodôntico prévio, analisadas por um ortodontista. Foram realizadas fotografias padronizadas extrabucais e intrabucais, para a classificação subjetiva dos Padrões Faciais e das relações dentárias segundo a classificação de Angle. Investigou-se a ocorrência de diferentes tipos de Padrões Faciais, em vistas frontal e de perfil; a relação entre os Padrões Faciais e as relações dentárias de Classe e, também, entre a má oclusão de mordida aberta anterior e o Padrão Face Longa. RESULTADOS: o Padrão Facial I (PF I) esteve presente em 64,24% das crianças; o PF II, em 21,29%; o PF III, em 6,62%; o PF Face Longa, em 5,96% e o PF Face Curta, em 1,99%. Observou-se concordância substancial entre a avaliação do PF na vista frontal e na de perfil, igual a 84% (Kappa = 0,69). Houve concordância entre a avaliação da relação dentária de Classe e do PF em 63% da amostra (Kappa = 0,27). O PF Face Longa não demonstrou maior prevalência da má oclusão de mordida aberta. CONCLUSÃO: os Padrões Faciais I e II foram os mais prevalentes em crianças, enquanto o menos prevalente foi o Padrão Face Curta. Verificou-se concordância significativa entre as análises faciais frontal e de perfil. Existe uma ligeira concordância entre o Padrão Facial e a relação sagital dentária. A mordida aberta anterior não se apresentou mais prevalente em nenhum tipo de Padrão Facial.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Child , Adolescent , Orthodontics , Face/anatomy & histology , Malocclusion/classification , Malocclusion/diagnosis , Photography , Photography, Dental , Open Bite/classification , Open Bite/epidemiology , Dental Occlusion , Face/diagnostic imaging , Orthodontists/psychology , Malocclusion/epidemiology , Malocclusion/diagnostic imaging
3.
Bauru; s.n; 2016. 117 p. tab, ilus.
Thesis in Portuguese | LILACS, BBO | ID: biblio-882109

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: Avaliar e comparar a influência das diferentes contenções ortodônticas superiores na fala e as percepções dos voluntários às diferentes condições provocadas pela sua utilização. Correlacionar as percepções entre si e com as dimensões do arco superior. Material e Métodos: Selecionou-se 21 (n) voluntários para utilizar 4 tipos de contenções removíveis superiores (Placa wrap-around convencional, em U e com orifício anterior e contenção termoplástica transparente-CTT) por 21 dias cada, com intervalos de 7 dias sem utilização entre elas. Durante a pesquisa, alguns voluntários desistiram ou não compareceram às avaliações, sendo excluídos. As percepções dos pacientes aos aparelhos foram avaliadas com a Escala Visual Analógica de 100 mm (n final=19), e correlacionou-se estas entre si. A avaliação da fala (n final=18) foi realizada em gravações de trechos vocais realizadas antes e imediatamente após a instalação das 4 contenções, assim como após 21 dias de uso destas. Para isto empregou-se a Análise Perceptiva Auditiva da fala e a Análise Acústica da frequência dos formantes F1 e F2 das vogais. Aplicou-se a ANOVA para dados repetidos e teste de Friedman com post hoc de Tukey, além das Correlações de Pearson e de Spearman para as avaliações. O nível de significância estatística estabelecido foi de 5%. Resultados: Os variados desenhos das contenções wrap-around não diferiram de forma significante em nenhuma das percepções e a CTT recebeu notas estatisticamente piores em todos os quesitos, com exceção da estética onde não diferiu estatisticamente das demais. Correlações positivas importantes foram encontradas entre alterações na fala e desconforto em todos os aparelhos. A interferência oclusal na CTT correlacionou-se muito positivamente a outras percepções, como alterações na fala e desconforto. Na avaliação perceptivo-auditiva, as alterações na fala aumentaram significantemente no momento imediato após a instalação do wrap-around com orifício e da CTT, e continuaram significantemente elevadas após 3 semanas. A frequência dos formantes das vogais foi prejudicada no momento inicial da instalação e as Alterações mantiveram-se presentes no wrap-around convencional, em U e na CTT após 3 semanas. Conclusões: A CTT prejudicou mais a fala que os wrap-around. Entre estes, os wrap-around convencional e em U interferiram menos na fala. O período de 3 semanas de uso dos aparelhos não foi totalmente suficiente para a readaptação da fala. A CTT foi pior classificada que as placas wrap-around em todas percepções avaliadas, exceto na estética, onde não diferiram significantemente. A cobertura oclusal da CTT pareceu ser a causadora da sua reprovação e das maiores alterações à fala nesta contenção. As dimensões do arco superior pouco influenciaram as percepções. Considerando as alterações na fala e as percepções dos pacientes, as contenções wrap-around apresentaram melhor desempenho e devem ser a primeira escolha quando a opção de contenção do arco superior for um aparelho removível.(AU)


Objective: To evaluate and compare the influence of different upper removable orthodontic retainers on speech and volunteers' perceptions to different conditions caused by their use. To correlate perceptions with each other and with upper arch dimensions. Material and Methods: 21 (n) volunteers were selected to use four types of upper removable retainers (conventional wrap-around, horseshoe-shaped wrap-around, wrap-around with an anterior "hole" and transparent thermoplastic retainer - TTR) for 21 days each, with intervals of 7 days without use between them. During the search, some volunteers dropped out or did not attend the evaluations and were excluded. Patients perceptions (final n=19) were evaluated with a visual analogue scale of 100 mm, and these were correlated with each other. Speech evaluation (final n=18) was performed in vocal excerpts recordings made before, immediately after and 21 days after the installation of each appliance, with Perceptual Auditory Analysis Auditory and Acoustic Analysis of formant frequencies F1 and F2 of the vowels. ANOVA for repeated measures and Friedman test with post hoc Tukey, in addition to Pearson and Spearman correlation for the evaluations were applied for statistics evaluation. The level of statistical significance was set at 5%. Results: Different designs of wrap-around retainers did not differ significantly in any of the perceptions and TTR received significantly worse grades in all aspects, except for esthetics, which did not statistically differ from the others. Significant positive correlations were observed between changes in speech and discomfort on all appliances. Occlusal interference in TTR was very positively correlated to other perceptions, such as changes in speech and discomfort. Speech changes, evaluated by Perceptual Auditory Analysis, increased immediately after conventional wraparound and TTR installation, and reduced after 3 weeks of use, but not back to normal levels observed without device. However, this increase was statistically significant only for the conventional wrap-around and TTR, remaining significant high after 3 weeks. Formant frequencies of vowels were altered at initial time and the changes remained present in conventional, horseshoe-shaped and TTR appliances after 3 weeks. Conclusions: TTR was more harmful to speech than the wrap-around appliances. Among these, conventional and horseshoe-shaped has interfered less in speech. The 3-week period with retainers was not fully sufficient for speech adaptation. TTR was worse classified than the wrap-around retainers in all evaluated perceptions, except in esthetics, which did not differ significantly. Occlusal coverage of TTR seems to be the cause of its rejection and its major changes to speech. Upper arch dimensions little influence volunteers perceptions. Considering speech changes and volunteers perceptions, the wrap-around retainers had better performance and should be the first choice when retainer option is a removable device in the upper arch.(AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Articulation Disorders/etiology , Orthodontic Appliance Design/adverse effects , Orthodontic Appliances/adverse effects , Analysis of Variance , Auditory Perception , Reference Values , Speech Acoustics , Speech Articulation Tests , Treatment Outcome , Visual Analog Scale
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL