Impact of clear aligner therapy on speech: does clear aligner therapy cause any speech difficulty?

DATA SOURCES: Electronic search was conducted up to September 2021 in three electronic databases including Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Only studies in English language were selected. STUDY SELECTION: Prospective and retrospective studies including cohort, cross-sectional, randomized control trials, and qualitative studies were included. Both the inclusion and exclusion criteria were reported. The search in the databases and the selection of the studies were performed independently by two reviewers. The included studies assessed the effects of clear aligner therapy on the speech difficulty. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. The data from the relevant studies were extracted into a customized Template. The systematic review was carried out and reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Details regarding the authors, year of publication, sample size, included participants, age, groups, outcome assessment, results, and inferences were extracted from the selected studies. The quality of the selected studies was assessed based on the relevant guidelines from Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. The criteria examined sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, outcome data, selective reporting, and other sources of bias. Non-randomized studies were assessed using the ROBINS-I tool (Risk of Bias in Non-randomized studies). The strength of evidence was assessed by the evidence grading system developed by the GRADE collaboration as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. RESULTS: The search identified 283 results. 269 articles were excluded based on their title and abstract after evaluation against the inclusion criteria. 14 articles were assessed in full text. Finally, 7 papers were included in the qualitative analysis. The included studies were 5 cohort studies and 2 randomized clinical studies. 332 patients were examined in the included studies. There were 195 females and 137 males. 191 patients were treated using clear aligner therapy (CAT) while 122 patients were treated using labial fixed appliances and 19 patients were treated using lingual orthodontic treatment. Out of the 191 patients who were treated using CAT, 179 patients were treated using Invisalign (Santa Clara, CA, USA) while 12 patients were treated using Smile Align (Mumbai, India). All seven selected studies examined speech dysfunction. The speech difficulty was assessed through two tools - semiobjective assessment by speech pathologists and professionals and subjective evaluations by the patients themselves through a patient questionnaire that assess the effects of aligners on speech. The risk of bias assessment revealed that two studies had moderate risk of bias while five articles had serious risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not performed due to the high heterogeneity of the included studies. The level of evidence was assessed as low due to the methodological insufficiencies and risk of bias in the included studies. The results showed that both CAT and fixed appliances (FA) resulted in speech difficulties in terms of clarity and delivery of speech that include speech alteration, slurring of words, lisping, and nasality. Some patients who were treated using CAT reported impairment in the lingual space that affected their speech. Lingual FA resulted in more speech difficulty when compared to labial FA and CAT. Aligners caused errors in the articulation of /s/,/z/,/zh/,/sh/,/th/,/ch/. Acoustic analysis revealed /s/ sound appeared most affected. Aligners had an effect on speech while reading, with patients slowing down to their speed to better articulate. The above-mentioned speech difficulties were transient. The included patients normalized their speech within 7-14 days from start of treatment while few patients took 30-60 days to recover. CONCLUSIONS: Although the likelihood of speech difficulties would be high with CAT, the current evidence states that speech difficulties shown with CAT are similar to those found with FA. However, the patients who were treated using CAT adapt quickly and speech recovers within a few weeks. Time to recovery varied greatly, ranging from a week to two months in certain cases.

Does short-term treatment with clear aligner therapy induce changes in muscular activity?

DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. COHORT SELECTION: The inclusion criteria comprised patients older than 18 years who attended the orthodontic department at the University of L'Aquila (L'Aquila, Italy) and requested treatment with clear orthodontic appliance. Only patients with Class I malocclusion with mild (0-3 mm) or moderate (4-6 mm) crowding were included. The exclusion criteria comprised patients who had medical condition that preclude the use of surface EMG (sEMG), patients who had anterior or posterior open bite, patients who had cross bite that include more than one tooth, patients who had edentulous ridges and patients with temporomandibular disorder. DATA ANALYSIS: Included patients were assessed at three points in time: at the start of treatment (T0), after 3 months (T1), and after 6 months (T2). The patients were instructed during the study to wear each set of aligners (Nuvola; Gruppo Europeo di Ortodonzia S.r.l., Rome, Italy) for 2 weeks and 22 h/d and to remove them while eating and drinking (except for still water). The following two assessments were done for each patient at T0, T1, and T2: surface electromyography (sEMG) evaluation and a T-Scan digital occlusal analysis evaluation. Both evaluations were performed in centric occlusion and with aligners worn. The assessments were done by the same operator. The sEMG evaluation aimed to assess the muscular symmetry and balance. The sEMG evaluation was performed using an instrument that recorded analogical sEMG signal (BTS TMJOINT, Teethan S.p.a., Garbagnate Milanese, Milano, Italy). The patients were instructed to clench as much as possible and to maintain the same level of contraction during the test. The software automatically selected the 3 s with the most stable sEMG signal. The following outcomes were assessed using the sEMG: 1. Masseter percentage overlapping coefficient (POC), temporalis POC, and mean POC: which is an index of the symmetrical distribution of sEMG potentials within homologous muscular couples. 2. Torque coefficient (TC): compares the activity of the temporalis muscle to that of the contralateral masseter muscle. 3. Activity index (Ac): compares the activity of the temporalis muscle to that of the homolateral masseter muscle 4. Asymmetry index (Asym): compares the activity of the temporalis and masseter muscles of the right side to those of the left side. The digital occlusal analysis was performed using a 100µ thin, flexible horseshoe-shaped Mylar sensor (Novus HD sensor, Tekscan, Inc. S. Boston, MA, USA) that is used to analyze the dynamic and real-time distribution and timing of occlusal contacts and can reproduce 256 levels of varying occlusal force. A first recording was made without aligners, then a second with the aligners worn on the dental arches. The following outcomes were assessed using the digital occlusal analysis: 1. Position of the center of occlusal force (COF). 2. The maximal intercuspation time (MIC) (i.e., the time interval expressed in seconds between the first dental contact and the maximal intercuspation). The null hypothesis was that no difference exists for the sEMG indexes between the 3-time points and the two occlusal conditions. RESULTS: Twenty-six female adult patients (mean age, 33.67 ± 13.33 years) were enrolled in this study. Statistically significant differences were observed in terms of POC for the temporalis and masseter muscles, as well as the mean POC across the three time points and between occlusal conditions (with or without aligner). Hence, null hypothesis was rejected. On the other hand, TC, Ac, Asym, and MIC variables did not exhibit any statistically significant differences. This confirms that the stable positioning of COF on the transverse plane was accompanied by the absence of torquing muscular couples or imbalances in muscular activation. Symmetry in muscular couples' activation (indicated by POC value) remained consistent over the 6-month follow-up period for the occlusion with aligners, and in fact, demonstrated some improvements. In contrast, there was a decline in POC over time during centric occlusion. Statistically significant variation in COF position was observed in the sagittal plane, but not in the transverse plane. This shift in COF position coincided with changes in muscular balance as assessed by surface electromyography. Regarding the anteroposterior position of the COF, an overall slight posterior shift was observed when aligners were worn. After 3 months of full-time aligner usage, an anterior COF position was detectable in centric occlusion, which exhibited statistical significance when compared with the occlusion involving aligners at T0 and T1. CONCLUSIONS: The use of clear aligners led to an anterior displacement of the COF during biting in centric occlusion, along with a posterior shift while the aligners were worn in healthy female subjects over a 6-month monitoring period. No significant asymmetries in the COF position on the transverse plane were observed. The alterations in occlusal contact were subsequently followed by a short-term improvement in muscular balance when aligners were used, but a worsening muscular balance over time in centric occlusion condition.

Does motivation via a smartphone application improve oral hygiene in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment?

DESIGN: This is a randomized cohort study. COHORT SELECTION: The inclusion criteria comprised patients aged 14-19 years who started their orthodontic treatment using fixed appliances at the Orthodontic Clinic at Universidade Cruzeiro do Sul, San Paulo, Brazil. Only patients who had smartphones were included in this study. The exclusion criteria comprised patients who had previous orthodontic treatment, presence of any oral pathology, and chronic use of analgesic medication or presence of syndromes. Included patients were randomized to two groups (control and experimental). DATA ANALYSIS: The oral hygiene of the included patients was evaluated clinically at five points in time: before bonding fixed orthodontic appliance (T0), immediately after randomization (T1), at 30 days after the beginning of the intervention (T2), at 60 days after the beginning of the intervention (T3), and at 90 days after the beginning of the intervention (T4). Oral hygiene was assessed using visual plaque index (VPI) and gingival bleeding index (GBI) at six sites of all teeth in every arch excluding third molars. Prior to the intervention, all patients who participated in this study underwent an oral hygiene session aimed to obtain a plaque index equal to zero and were given standardized oral hygiene instructions. Patients included in the control group were not given any structured oral hygiene follow-up in addition to the standard follow-up already established at the orthodontic clinic. Patients in the experimental group were instructed to install an application (A Dentista Cientista) that was designed especially for this study on their smartphones. This application aimed to guide and motivate patients daily in a playful way about performing oral hygiene practices. The application reminded the patients to perform their oral hygiene through an alarm. RESULTS: A total of 11 patients were screened for study eligibility; 3 patients were excluded from the study. Eight patients were included in this study, four patients in each group. Although VPI and GBI values were reduced at T1 and T2 in the experimental group, there were no statistically significant differences for VPI and GBI between the groups at any time evaluated (P > 0.05). The patients who were included in the experimental group reported a good acceptability of the application and they would recommend it to other people. In addition, the patients who were included in the experimental group agreed that oral hygiene is crucial and 75% of them agreed that the application encouraged them to take better care of their oral health. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that mobile applications might help in improving the oral hygiene of orthodontic adolescent patients.

Do orthodontic treatments using fixed appliances and clear aligner achieve comparable quality of occlusal contacts?

Design Non-randomised cohort study.Cohort selection The inclusion criteria comprised patients who finished their comprehensive orthodontic treatment based on a camouflage non-extraction modality using self-ligating orthodontic appliances therapy (SPEED brackets, Canada or Empower brackets, American Ortho, Sheboygan, WI, USA) or clear aligner therapy (Invisalign, Align Technology, San Jose, CA, USA). Patients were recruited from a university orthodontic clinic and a senior orthodontist's practice. The exclusion criteria comprised patients presenting with hypodontia, microdontia, severe periodontal problems, heavily resorted teeth and patients who were using retainers with occlusal coverage.Data analysis Included patients were assessed at three points in time: at the end of active orthodontic treatment and the start of retention phase (T0); at three months post treatment (T3); and at six months post treatment (T6). The following three assessments were done for each patient at T0, T3 and T6: a T-Scan 10 digital occlusal analysis recording into maximum intercuspation position (MIP); self-report about retainer compliance; and self-assessment of occlusal comfort using a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0-10 (0 = very uncomfortable; 10 = maximum comfort).The digital occlusal analysis was performed using a 100µ thin, flexible, horseshoe-shaped Mylar sensor (Novus HD sensor, Tekscan Inc, S. Boston, MA, USA). This sensor contains 1,370 active pressure sensing cells, known as sensels, arranged in a compact grid, shaped as a dental arch. The patients were given instructions on how to bite on the sensor. With the sensor still in the patient's mouth, three consecutive self-intercuspated closure-into-MIP registrations were recorded. If there was a need to repeat the procedure, one minute was given as a rest. If several recordings were done for the same patient in the same visit, the most consistency between the three consecutive intercuspations was used for analysis. In addition, the same sensor was used in T0, T3 and T6, unless the sensor shown excessive wear.The following outcomes were assessed using the digital occlusal analysis: 1) an estimate of occlusal contact surface area based on the activated sensels on the sensor at MIP; 2) the total surface of contacts and the area ratio between anterior (canine to canine) to posterior (premolar to second molar) contact surfaces; 3) the overall relative force distribution based on the by the position of the centre of force (COF); 4) the symmetry of contact distribution was expressed as the percentage of contacts on the right side to the left side (%R/L); and 5) the time-simultaneity of the closure into MIP contacts was calculated by the occlusion time measurement which is the duration between first contact and the time MIP was reached.Results In total, 39 patients were enrolled in the study. The self-ligating fixed appliance group included 25 patients (mean age 18.7 ± 5.2; 6 women, 19 men) while the clear aligner therapy group included 14 patients (mean age 20.6 ± 7.3; ten women, four men). Both groups were matched in terms of age, Angle's classification, symmetry, retention protocol and total number of bonded lingual wires or facial type. However, they were not matched in terms of sex, with more women in the aligner group (p = 0.007). Moreover, eight patients (four in each group) were excluded from the study later on due to a change in the retention protocol or a missed visit. The results showed that self-reported compliance with a Hawley retainer was not different between groups. Occlusal comfort was similar in both groups at treatment completion, with a median score of eight in both groups.The results showed that were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding all outcomes assessed using the digital occlusal analysis. Although the %R/L (normal range = 50% ± 5%) was not significantly different between both groups, neither treatment resulted in ideal occlusal balance (ie symmetry). Indeed, ten patients finished their treatment with subtle asymmetry (%R/L >50 ± 10%), especially in the self-ligating fixed appliance group (nine patients) showing side force differences (five right dominant, four left dominant) versus only one patient in the clear aligner group (left dominant).The COF moved posteriorly in both groups from T0 to T6, in parallel with a decreased ratio of anterior to posterior surface area. A statistically significant difference was observed in the anteroposterior position of COF between sexes, being more anterior in women at all times (p <0.002).Conclusions The quality of the occlusal contacts in MIP was comparable in both groups at T0, T3 and T6. Neither treatment resulted in an ideal occlusal balance (that is, symmetry). Ten patients finished their treatment with subtle occlusal force asymmetry (that is, asymmetric left-to-right side occlusal force distribution), especially in the self-ligating fixed appliance group. Most occlusal changes happened during the first three months of the retention phase, with more posterior contacts forces developing in both groups. In this study, female patients maintained more anterior COF when compared to male patients.

Do orthodontic fixed retainers guarantee the stability of dental alignment at the end of orthodontic treatment?

Data sources Electronic searches of studies on orthodontic retainers were conducted up to 12 February 2021 in four electronic databases including Scopus, Web of Science, Embase and PubMed. Only studies in English language were included.Study selection Only clinical studies were included. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were reported. The initial search identified 117 results. After removing duplicate studies, studies were evaluated against the inclusion criteria. Finally, 21 papers were included. Selection of the studies was performed independently by two reviewers. The included studies assessed the effects of the type of orthodontic wire or fibre splint, the material used to bond it to the teeth and the procedure for bonding on the failure rate of the fixed orthodontic retainers.Data extraction and synthesis Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. They followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. The following items were extracted: authors, year, type of study, study objective, number of subjects, comparison made, outcome measured and results. Three tools were used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies including the revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (RoB 2), the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case-control studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort Studies. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model.Results Twenty-one studies were included in the qualitative analysis while seven studies were included in the quantitative analysis. The included studies were three retrospective cohort studies, two case-controlled studies and 16 randomised clinical studies. The results showed that the failure rate of orthodontic fixed retainers ranged from 7.3% to 50%. Failure rates of fixed retainers placed in the maxilla were higher than those placed in the mandible. Previous failure increased the risk of repeat failure. Adhesive failure was considered the most common type of bond failure that was observed in fixed lingual retainers. The type of wire or splint has no effect on the failure rate. Results showed that retainers bonded to all teeth were more efficient in maintaining alignment when compared to retainers bonded on the teeth on the ends only. Indirect bonding techniques have no advantage over direct bonding techniques except for shorter chair time. Bonding fibre-reinforced composite retainers were more sensitive to operator skills, hence failure rates would be high if an incorrect technique was used when bonding.Conclusions No fixed retainer can guarantee the stability of alignment stability after orthodontic treatment. Retainers that are bonded to all teeth are preferable to those bonded only at the ends of the wire. Wires and fibre splints were similar regarding failure rates and stability of alignment.