Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
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.
Rev. Ateneo Argent. Odontol ; 41(1): 16-24, ene.-dic. 2002. ilus
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: lil-322917

ABSTRACT

La estabilidad es un requerimiento primordial a tener en cuenta en un tratamiento ortodóntico. Su excelencia es difícil de obtener pero hay requisitos a cumplimentar para acercanos a ella. La contención puede ser fija o removible; temporaria o definitiva; activa o pasiva. Su indicación depende fundamentalmente de los factores de crecimiento de la anomalía corregida, del estado periodontal, de la edad del paciente. La contención se usa preferentemente en forma definitiva en dentición permanente, realizándose, en realidad, una "retención" de los objetivos logrados. La removible, activa, suele ser de uso transitorio en pacientes jóvenes, se realiza una "contención" que tiende a compensar los factores de crecimiento. Todo paciente debe ser informado inicialmente de esta etapa del tratamiento ya que es tan importante como la corrección de la anomalía misma


Subject(s)
Humans , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Orthodontics, Corrective , Orthodontic Retainers/classification , Orthodontic Retainers/standards , Age Factors , Alveolar Process , Orthodontic Appliances , Orthodontic Appliances, Functional , Orthodontic Appliances, Removable , Bone Remodeling , Malocclusion/physiopathology , Malocclusion/therapy , Maxillofacial Development , Periodontium , Recurrence , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL