{"title":"Evaluation of the Consistency of Two Interproximal Reduction Methods in Clear Aligner Therapy: A Preliminary Study.","authors":"Pelinsu Güleç Ergün, Ayça Arman Özçırpıcı, Azize Atakan Kocabalkan, Nilüfer İrem Tunçer","doi":"10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2023.2022.158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the consistency of two interproximal reduction (IPR) methods in terms of the amount of planned and performed IPR during clear aligner therapy (CAT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-four patients who received IPR using hand-operated abrasive strips (Group 1, 20 patients, 162 teeth) and motor-driven 3/4 oscillating segmental disks (Group 2, 14 patients, 134 teeth) during CAT were included in this preliminary study. The consistency between the planned and performed IPR amounts was evaluated within and between groups for teeth and quadrants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In Group 1, the amount of IPR performed on teeth numbers 22 and 43 and in the upper left quadrant was found to be statistically less than that of planned. On the other hand, the amount of performed IPR was statistically higher on tooth number 44 and in the upper right quadrant, whereas it was statistically less on tooth number 33 when compared with the planned amount in Group 2. The inconsistency between the planned and performed IPR amounts were statistically significant only in Group 1 and for teeth numbers 11, 21, 32, 33, and 43. No significant difference was found when the same parameter was compared between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The consistency of IPR was found to be better with the motor-driven oscillating disk system than with the hand-operated IPR strip system.</p>","PeriodicalId":37013,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"37 1","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10986455/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2023.2022.158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To compare the consistency of two interproximal reduction (IPR) methods in terms of the amount of planned and performed IPR during clear aligner therapy (CAT).
Methods: Thirty-four patients who received IPR using hand-operated abrasive strips (Group 1, 20 patients, 162 teeth) and motor-driven 3/4 oscillating segmental disks (Group 2, 14 patients, 134 teeth) during CAT were included in this preliminary study. The consistency between the planned and performed IPR amounts was evaluated within and between groups for teeth and quadrants.
Results: In Group 1, the amount of IPR performed on teeth numbers 22 and 43 and in the upper left quadrant was found to be statistically less than that of planned. On the other hand, the amount of performed IPR was statistically higher on tooth number 44 and in the upper right quadrant, whereas it was statistically less on tooth number 33 when compared with the planned amount in Group 2. The inconsistency between the planned and performed IPR amounts were statistically significant only in Group 1 and for teeth numbers 11, 21, 32, 33, and 43. No significant difference was found when the same parameter was compared between the groups.
Conclusion: The consistency of IPR was found to be better with the motor-driven oscillating disk system than with the hand-operated IPR strip system.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
