ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to investigate the trends in the use of fixed appliance and accelerated orthodontics to decrease the treatment duration. Further, this study aimed to assess the effect of demographic factors on the participant's choice of treatment modality. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study in the form of questionnaire-based online survey especially designed and distributed to 265 orthodontists via email. The questions aimed to collect basic information about the participants and respondents' choices for decreasing the treatment duration. The data were analyzed according to gender, level of academic education and years of clinical experience using Chi-square test. RESULTS: A response rate of 85.2% was reported. Most of the orthodontists aimed to reduce the treatment duration by the biomechanical (66.8%) and surgical approaches (27.4%). The use of sliding mechanics (69.4%) and one-step retraction was more common (66.3%). MBT bracket prescription was more prevalent (51.7%), followed by Roth (41.1%). Conventional brackets were used more than self-ligating brackets, and aesthetic brackets were avoided by one third of the respondents. NiTi wires were the most commonly used wires during the alignment stage (44.2%). However, the effect of gender, years of clinical experience and specialty level of education showed some effects on the use of certain techniques and clinical practice of the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the orthodontists aimed to decrease orthodontic treatment duration by using biomechanical and surgical approaches. Gender and clinical experience to a certain extent affected the participants' choice during orthodontic treatment.
ABSTRACT
Background/Purpose. In the literature, no consensus about the duration of orthodontic treatment has been reached out. This study aimed to identify orthodontist's and patient's perception about the time of orthodontic treatment and their willingness to undergo and pay for various acceleration techniques and procedures. Materials and Methods. An electronic survey was conducted from August to October 2020. The questionnaire consisted of 20 multiple choice questions which was designed and emailed to members of the Iraqi Orthodontic Society and self-administered to patients in several orthodontic centers in Baghdad. The questionnaire included questions about the perception toward the duration of orthodontic treatment, approval of different procedures used to reduce treatment time, and how much fee increment they are able to pay for various techniques and appliances. Descriptive and chi-square test statistics were used, and the level of significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Results. The response rate was 78.7%. The willingness for additional techniques and procedures was rated in the following order: customized appliances: 50.8% orthodontists and 38.4% patients, followed by intraoral vibrating devices: 49.2% orthodontists and 38.1% patients, piezocision: 10.2% orthodontists and 8.2% patients, and corticotomies: 8.1% orthodontists and 5.9% patients. Most orthodontists were willing to pay up to 40% of treatment income for the acceleration procedure, while the payment of patients was up to 20%. Conclusion. Both orthodontists and patients were interested in techniques that can decrease the treatment duration. Noninvasive accelerating procedures were more preferable by orthodontists and patients than invasive surgical procedures.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To identify the most common retention protocols practiced by Iraqi orthodontists using a specially designed e-survey. Furthermore, this study aimed to assess the effect of sociodemographic factors on the participant's choice. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-five questionnaires with 23 multiple choice questions were sent to members of the Iraqi Orthodontic Society. The questionnaire was organized into four sections representing information about sociodemographic status of the orthodontists, factors affecting the selection of the retention system, commonly used retainers in the upper arch and lower arch, and duration of the retention system. The chi-square test was used to test the significant association between different variable and sociodemographic factors. RESULTS: The response rate was 87.5%. The majority of the respondents considered the original malocclusion (80.2%) and clinical experience (49.7%) as the main factors for choosing the retention protocol. In the maxillary arch, a combination of vacuum-formed retainer and fixed retainer (35%) was mostly applied; in the mandibular arch, a fixed retainer was mainly used (46.7%). Most of the respondents recommended initial full-time wearing of a removable appliance (78.2%), especially in the first 3-6 months (47.2%). According to the respondents, bonding a fixed retainer to all anterior teeth was most common (79.7%), fabricated, and adapted directly inside the patient's mouth (75.1%). More than half used flowable composite (54.8%) and recommend leaving the retainer forever (53.8%). Most of the variables showed a statistically significant association between the sociodemographic factors and type, duration, and fabrication of the retainer used. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of removable and fixed retainers was commonly used in orthodontics retention, and sociodemographic factors significantly affected retainer choice.
