Perception of treatments with self-ligating and conventional brackets in peruvian orthodontists.

Revista Cientifica Odontologica Pub Date : 2024-09-17 eCollection Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.21142/2523-2754-1203-2024-206
Diego Alonso Huayta-Garcia, Kilder Maynor Carranza-Samanez, Julissa Amparo Dulanto-Vargas
{"title":"Perception <b>of treatments with self-ligating and conventional brackets in peruvian orthodontists</b>.","authors":"Diego Alonso Huayta-Garcia, Kilder Maynor Carranza-Samanez, Julissa Amparo Dulanto-Vargas","doi":"10.21142/2523-2754-1203-2024-206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Orthodontists' perception of bracket techniques plays a significant role in planning, allowing critical evaluation of the patient's facial aesthetics.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the perception of Peruvian orthodontists regarding treatments with self-ligating and conventional brackets.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A questionnaire was applied to 168 orthodontic specialists (53% men, average professional experience 9 years) to evaluate preferences for treatment phases, benefits of patient consultation according to the type of bracket, experience with self-ligating brackets, and demographic and clinical characteristics (sex, years of experience, volume of care and length of experience). The Kruskal-Wallis Test and Chi-square test were used with P < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The total preference for self-ligating brackets (48.9%) was higher than conventional brackets (18.8%). Self-ligating brackets were preferred in most treatment phases (46.4%-63.7%) but not in completion and finishing, in which conventional brackets were preferred. Most orthodontists preferred self-ligating brackets (40.5%-60.7%) over conventional brackets (4.2%-14.3%) due to patient comfort, oral hygiene, and total treatment and appointment time control, but not the cost. The orthodontists reported SLB having mastered their technique in <10 cases (59.5%), the experience of <2 years (45.2%), applying control times of 4-9 weeks (78.6%), and feeling comfortable with their use (89.3%). Preferences were not associated with sex (<i>P</i> > 0.05) but rather with years of professional experience (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Peruvian orthodontists preferred self-ligating brackets over conventional brackets in most treatment phases associated with user comfort and oral hygiene management and treatment/control time, and professional experience. However, some factors, such as cost-effectiveness, counteracted this preference.</p>","PeriodicalId":33326,"journal":{"name":"Revista Cientifica Odontologica","volume":"12 3","pages":"e206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11495169/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Cientifica Odontologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21142/2523-2754-1203-2024-206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Orthodontists' perception of bracket techniques plays a significant role in planning, allowing critical evaluation of the patient's facial aesthetics.

Objective: To compare the perception of Peruvian orthodontists regarding treatments with self-ligating and conventional brackets.

Methods: A questionnaire was applied to 168 orthodontic specialists (53% men, average professional experience 9 years) to evaluate preferences for treatment phases, benefits of patient consultation according to the type of bracket, experience with self-ligating brackets, and demographic and clinical characteristics (sex, years of experience, volume of care and length of experience). The Kruskal-Wallis Test and Chi-square test were used with P < 0.05.

Results: The total preference for self-ligating brackets (48.9%) was higher than conventional brackets (18.8%). Self-ligating brackets were preferred in most treatment phases (46.4%-63.7%) but not in completion and finishing, in which conventional brackets were preferred. Most orthodontists preferred self-ligating brackets (40.5%-60.7%) over conventional brackets (4.2%-14.3%) due to patient comfort, oral hygiene, and total treatment and appointment time control, but not the cost. The orthodontists reported SLB having mastered their technique in <10 cases (59.5%), the experience of <2 years (45.2%), applying control times of 4-9 weeks (78.6%), and feeling comfortable with their use (89.3%). Preferences were not associated with sex (P > 0.05) but rather with years of professional experience (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Peruvian orthodontists preferred self-ligating brackets over conventional brackets in most treatment phases associated with user comfort and oral hygiene management and treatment/control time, and professional experience. However, some factors, such as cost-effectiveness, counteracted this preference.

秘鲁正畸医生对自锁托槽和传统托槽治疗的看法。
介绍:正畸医生对托槽技术的认知在计划中起着重要作用,可以对患者的面部美学进行严格评估:比较秘鲁正畸医生对自锁托槽和传统托槽治疗的看法:对 168 名正畸专家(53% 为男性,平均从业年限为 9 年)进行了问卷调查,以评估他们对治疗阶段的偏好、根据托槽类型咨询患者的益处、使用自锁托槽的经验以及人口统计学和临床特征(性别、从业年限、治疗量和从业年限)。采用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验和 Chi-square 检验,P < 0.05:自锁托槽的总偏好率(48.9%)高于传统托槽(18.8%)。在大多数治疗阶段(46.4%-63.7%),自锁托槽更受青睐,但在完成和收尾阶段,自锁托槽不受青睐,在这两个阶段,传统托槽更受青睐。与传统托槽(4.2%-14.3%)相比,大多数正畸医生更青睐自锁式托槽(40.5%-60.7%),原因是患者舒适、口腔卫生、总体治疗和预约时间可控,但成本不高。正畸医生表示,SLB 掌握了他们的技术(P > 0.05),但与多年的专业经验有关(P < 0.05):秘鲁正畸医生在大多数治疗阶段都更倾向于使用自锁托槽,而不是传统托槽,这与使用者的舒适度、口腔卫生管理、治疗/控制时间以及专业经验有关。然而,成本效益等一些因素抵消了这种偏好。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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