RESUMO
To compare the patient acceptance between fixed orthodontic appliances and clear aligners. An electronic search was completed in PubMed, Cochrane Database, Web of Science, Scopus, Lilacs, Google Scholar, and Open Grey databases without any restrictions until August 23. All comparative study types contrasting patient perception between clear aligners and fixed appliances were included. After removal of duplicates, exclusion by title and abstract, and reading the full text, only eight articles were included. The studies used an observational questionnaire study design. Of the observational studies, one was retrospective and three prospective, one online survey, and the other three cross sectional. Though the response varied in terms of patient preference and acceptance, it was found that clear aligners have a positive impact with respect to quality of life, tolerance, and improved confidence. However, there is not enough evidence to make a final conclusion about treatment outcomes.
RESUMO
Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the bond strengths of stainless steel brackets and ceramic brackets after treated with conventional visible light and argon laser. Methodology: Extracted 80 human premolar teeth were collected and stored in distilled water. They are classified into four groups. All teeth were placed in acrylic block where long axis of the tooth should be perpendicular to the mold's bottom. Teeth were subjected to ×10 magnification after debonding. Results: There is no statistically significant difference was found between the shear bond strength of argon laser and conventional visible light for stainless steel and ceramic bracket. Ceramic brackets had significantly increased bond strength than stainless steel brackets. Conclusion: Argon laser can be used for bonding orthodontic brackets using a visible light-cure orthodontic adhesive system, and ceramic brackets had significantly increased bond strength than stainless steel.
RESUMO
AIM: The objective of this study was to determine the problem encountered by an orthodontist due to suspended treatment during and after lockdown COVID 19 and to assess the pandemic impact on orthodontic practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional web-based questionnaire survey conducted among orthodontist in India. The pilot study was conducted to estimate the sample size and final sample size is 263 participants. The predesigned and validated, self-administered, structured 10 questions related to the impact of an orthodontist and their orthodontic practices during and after COVID 19 are used. The statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences SPSS (V 22.0) the frequency distribution was computed. RESULTS: The result showed that 81% orthodontist were reported that routine orthodontic treatment was disturbed due to this COVID 19 lockdown, about 79.1% reported hospital/clinic was closed due to lockdown with a duration of more than 1 month. Still, 64.6% orthodontist handling their orthodontic emergencies through telecommunication and 47.9% of orthodontist received a complaint about fixed appliance among all other appliances. Due to the current situation, 41.4% orthodontist suggested 3-6 months' period required to normalize the current situation and 66.9% agreed that there will be decline in orthodontic treatment need after COVID 19. CONCLUSION: Owing to the high virulence activity, elective procedures have been postponed and can manage a patient through virtual teleconsultation. Reassurance of the patient is needed regarding prolonged treatment duration due to this COVID 19 pandemic.
