Percentage of patients shifting to another treatment modality: An experience-guided decision

Q2 Medicine
Shivangi Kumari, Manish Goyal, Mukesh Kumar, Mannu Khanna, Ekta Yadav, Tanisha Singh
{"title":"Percentage of patients shifting to another treatment modality: An experience-guided decision","authors":"Shivangi Kumari, Manish Goyal, Mukesh Kumar, Mannu Khanna, Ekta Yadav, Tanisha Singh","doi":"10.1590/2177-6709.29.1.e2423133.oar","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective: This study aimed to assess the frequency with which orthodontic patients decided to shift to another type of orthodontic appliance, among conventional metal brackets, ceramic brackets, lingual brackets and clear aligner, based on their personal experiences of pain, ulcers, bad breath, hygiene issues and social difficulties. Material and Methods: This study comprises of patients seeking orthodontic treatment. The sample (n = 500; age group = 19-25 years) was divided equally into four groups based on the treatment modality: conventional metal brackets, ceramic brackets, lingual brackets and clear aligner. Patients rated the questionnaire using a visual analogue scale, to assess variables (such as pain, ulcer etc) that impact various treatment modalities. Subsequently, patients from all groups provided feedback regarding their treatment experiences, and expressed their preference for an alternative modality. Intergroup comparison among the four groups was done using one-way analysis of variance with Tukey’s HSD post-hoc test (p ≤ 0.05). Results: Patients who received lingual brackets reported higher levels of pain and ulceration, as compared to those who received clear aligners. All four groups showed statistically significant differences for ulcers during treatment (p ≤ 0.05). Of the 125 patients who received conventional metal brackets, 28% expressed a preference for clear aligner therapy, while 20% preferred ceramic brackets. In the lingual group, 56% of 125 patients preferred clear aligner therapy, and 8% preferred ceramic brackets to complete their treatment. In the ceramic group, 83% did not want to switch, whereas 17% desired to switch to clear aligner, while in aligner group no patient desired to switch. Conclusions: A higher percentage of patients from lingual brackets group chose to shift to clear aligners, followed by conventional metal brackets group and by ceramic brackets group, in this descending order. The clear aligner group demonstrated fewer issues than the other treatment modalities.","PeriodicalId":38720,"journal":{"name":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.29.1.e2423133.oar","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective: This study aimed to assess the frequency with which orthodontic patients decided to shift to another type of orthodontic appliance, among conventional metal brackets, ceramic brackets, lingual brackets and clear aligner, based on their personal experiences of pain, ulcers, bad breath, hygiene issues and social difficulties. Material and Methods: This study comprises of patients seeking orthodontic treatment. The sample (n = 500; age group = 19-25 years) was divided equally into four groups based on the treatment modality: conventional metal brackets, ceramic brackets, lingual brackets and clear aligner. Patients rated the questionnaire using a visual analogue scale, to assess variables (such as pain, ulcer etc) that impact various treatment modalities. Subsequently, patients from all groups provided feedback regarding their treatment experiences, and expressed their preference for an alternative modality. Intergroup comparison among the four groups was done using one-way analysis of variance with Tukey’s HSD post-hoc test (p ≤ 0.05). Results: Patients who received lingual brackets reported higher levels of pain and ulceration, as compared to those who received clear aligners. All four groups showed statistically significant differences for ulcers during treatment (p ≤ 0.05). Of the 125 patients who received conventional metal brackets, 28% expressed a preference for clear aligner therapy, while 20% preferred ceramic brackets. In the lingual group, 56% of 125 patients preferred clear aligner therapy, and 8% preferred ceramic brackets to complete their treatment. In the ceramic group, 83% did not want to switch, whereas 17% desired to switch to clear aligner, while in aligner group no patient desired to switch. Conclusions: A higher percentage of patients from lingual brackets group chose to shift to clear aligners, followed by conventional metal brackets group and by ceramic brackets group, in this descending order. The clear aligner group demonstrated fewer issues than the other treatment modalities.
转向其他治疗方式的患者比例:经验指导下的决定
摘要 目的:本研究旨在评估正畸患者根据疼痛、溃疡、口臭、卫生问题和社交困难等个人经历,决定在传统金属托槽、陶瓷托槽、舌侧托槽和透明矫治器中改用另一种正畸装置的频率。材料和方法:本研究由寻求正畸治疗的患者组成。样本(n = 500;年龄组 = 19-25岁)根据治疗方式平均分为四组:传统金属托槽、陶瓷托槽、舌侧托槽和透明矫治器。患者使用视觉模拟量表对问卷进行评分,以评估影响各种治疗方式的变量(如疼痛、溃疡等)。随后,各组患者就其治疗体验提供了反馈意见,并表达了他们对其他治疗方式的偏好。采用单因素方差分析和 Tukey's HSD 事后检验对四组患者进行组间比较(P ≤ 0.05)。结果:与接受透明矫治器治疗的患者相比,接受舌侧托槽治疗的患者报告的疼痛和溃疡程度更高。所有四组患者在治疗期间出现溃疡的差异均有统计学意义(P ≤ 0.05)。在接受传统金属托槽治疗的125名患者中,28%表示更喜欢透明矫治器,20%则更喜欢陶瓷托槽。在舌侧组,125 名患者中有 56% 的人选择透明矫治器治疗,8% 的人选择陶瓷托槽完成治疗。在陶瓷托槽组中,83%的患者不希望更换托槽,17%的患者希望更换为透明对齐器,而在对齐器组中,没有患者希望更换托槽。结论:舌侧托槽组选择转用透明矫治器的患者比例较高,其次是传统金属托槽组和陶瓷托槽组,依次递减。与其他治疗方式相比,透明矫治器组出现的问题较少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: The Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics publishes scientific research articles, significant reviews, clinical and technical case reports, brief communications, and other materials related to Orthodontics and Facial Orthopedics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信