Patient-reported outcomes during accelerating the en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth using low-intensity electrical stimulation: a randomized controlled trial.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 Dentistry
Rashad I Shaadouh, Mohammad Y Hajeer, Ghiath A Mahmoud, Imad Addin Almasri, Samer T Jaber, Mohammad Khursheed Alam
{"title":"Patient-reported outcomes during accelerating the en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth using low-intensity electrical stimulation: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Rashad I Shaadouh, Mohammad Y Hajeer, Ghiath A Mahmoud, Imad Addin Almasri, Samer T Jaber, Mohammad Khursheed Alam","doi":"10.1186/s40510-024-00517-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low-intensity electrical stimulation (LIES) is considered a relatively recent technology that has received little attention in orthodontics as a method of acceleration. This study aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures when LIES is used to accelerate the en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The sample consisted of 40 patients (8 males, 32 females; mean age 21.1 ± 2.3 years), with Class II division I malocclusion who required extraction of the first premolars to retract upper anterior teeth. They were randomly assigned to the LIES group (n = 20) and the conventional en-masse retraction group (CER; n = 20). Patient responses regarding pain, discomfort, burning sensation, swelling, chewing difficulty, speech difficulty, and painkillers' consumption were recorded at these nine assessment times: 24 h (T1), 3 days (T2), and 7 days (T3) after force application, then in the second month after 24 h (T4), 3 days (T5), and 7 days (T6) of force re-activation, and finally after 24 h (T7), 3 days (T8), and 7 days (T9) of force re-activation in the third month.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean values of pain perception were smaller in the LIES group than those in the CER group at all assessment times with no statistically significant differences between the two groups except during the second and third months (T5, T6, T8, and T9; P < 0.005). However, discomfort mean values were greater in the LIES group with significant differences compared to CER group during the first week of the follow-up only (T1, T2, and T3; P < 0.005). Burning sensation levels were very mild in the LIES group, with significant differences between the two groups at T1 and T2 only (P < 0.001). Speech difficulty was significantly greater in the LIES group compared to CER group at all studied times (P < 0.001). High levels of satisfaction and acceptance were reported in both groups, without any significant difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both the LIES-based acceleration of en-masse retraction of upper anterior teeth and the conventional retraction were accompanied by mild to moderate pain, discomfort, and chewing difficulty on the first day of retraction. These sensations gradually decreased and almost disappeared over a week after force application or re-activation.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05920525. Registered 17 June 2023 - retrospectively registered, http://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05920525?term=NCT05920525&rank=1 .</p>","PeriodicalId":56071,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Orthodontics","volume":"25 1","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11089026/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-024-00517-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Low-intensity electrical stimulation (LIES) is considered a relatively recent technology that has received little attention in orthodontics as a method of acceleration. This study aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures when LIES is used to accelerate the en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth.

Materials and methods: The sample consisted of 40 patients (8 males, 32 females; mean age 21.1 ± 2.3 years), with Class II division I malocclusion who required extraction of the first premolars to retract upper anterior teeth. They were randomly assigned to the LIES group (n = 20) and the conventional en-masse retraction group (CER; n = 20). Patient responses regarding pain, discomfort, burning sensation, swelling, chewing difficulty, speech difficulty, and painkillers' consumption were recorded at these nine assessment times: 24 h (T1), 3 days (T2), and 7 days (T3) after force application, then in the second month after 24 h (T4), 3 days (T5), and 7 days (T6) of force re-activation, and finally after 24 h (T7), 3 days (T8), and 7 days (T9) of force re-activation in the third month.

Results: The mean values of pain perception were smaller in the LIES group than those in the CER group at all assessment times with no statistically significant differences between the two groups except during the second and third months (T5, T6, T8, and T9; P < 0.005). However, discomfort mean values were greater in the LIES group with significant differences compared to CER group during the first week of the follow-up only (T1, T2, and T3; P < 0.005). Burning sensation levels were very mild in the LIES group, with significant differences between the two groups at T1 and T2 only (P < 0.001). Speech difficulty was significantly greater in the LIES group compared to CER group at all studied times (P < 0.001). High levels of satisfaction and acceptance were reported in both groups, without any significant difference.

Conclusion: Both the LIES-based acceleration of en-masse retraction of upper anterior teeth and the conventional retraction were accompanied by mild to moderate pain, discomfort, and chewing difficulty on the first day of retraction. These sensations gradually decreased and almost disappeared over a week after force application or re-activation.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05920525. Registered 17 June 2023 - retrospectively registered, http://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05920525?term=NCT05920525&rank=1 .

使用低强度电刺激加速上前牙整体后缩过程中的患者报告结果:随机对照试验。
背景:低强度电刺激(LIES)被认为是一种相对较新的技术,在正畸学中作为一种加速方法很少受到关注。本研究旨在评估使用低强度电刺激加速上前牙整体后缩的患者报告结果:样本由 40 名患者组成(8 名男性,32 名女性;平均年龄为 21.1 ± 2.3 岁),他们都患有 II 类 I 区错颌畸形,需要拔除第一前磨牙来牵引上前牙。他们被随机分配到 LIES 组(n = 20)和传统全口牵引组(CER;n = 20)。在9个评估时间段记录患者对疼痛、不适、灼热感、肿胀、咀嚼困难、言语困难和止痛药用量的反应:加力后24小时(T1)、3天(T2)和7天(T3),然后在第二个月加力后24小时(T4)、3天(T5)和7天(T6),最后在第三个月加力后24小时(T7)、3天(T8)和7天(T9):除第二个月和第三个月(T5、T6、T8 和 T9;P 结论)外,LIES 组在所有评估时间的痛觉平均值均小于 CER 组,两组间差异无统计学意义:基于 LIES 的上前牙整体加速牵引法和传统牵引法在牵引第一天都伴有轻度至中度疼痛、不适和咀嚼困难。这些感觉逐渐减轻,并在施力或重新激活后一周内几乎消失:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov,NCT05920525。注册日期:2023 年 6 月 17 日--回顾性注册,http://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05920525?term=NCT05920525&rank=1 。
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
Progress in Orthodontics
Progress in Orthodontics Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
4.20%
发文量
45
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Progress in Orthodontics is a fully open access, international journal owned by the Italian Society of Orthodontics and published under the brand SpringerOpen. The Society is currently covering all publication costs so there are no article processing charges for authors. It is a premier journal of international scope that fosters orthodontic research, including both basic research and development of innovative clinical techniques, with an emphasis on the following areas: • Mechanisms to improve orthodontics • Clinical studies and control animal studies • Orthodontics and genetics, genomics • Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) control clinical trials • Efficacy of orthodontic appliances and animal models • Systematic reviews and meta analyses • Mechanisms to speed orthodontic treatment Progress in Orthodontics will consider for publication only meritorious and original contributions. These may be: • Original articles reporting the findings of clinical trials, clinically relevant basic scientific investigations, or novel therapeutic or diagnostic systems • Review articles on current topics • Articles on novel techniques and clinical tools • Articles of contemporary interest
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信