两种 3 x 3 保持器的牙周指数:0.032 英寸 SS V 形环与 0.0215 英寸 SS 同轴--随机交叉试验。

Q2 Medicine
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics Pub Date : 2024-01-08 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/2177-6709.28.6.e2323175.oar
Diogo Marques Sapata, Cléverson de Oliveira E Silva, Renata Corrêa Pascotto, Thais Maria Freire Fernandes Poleti, Maristela Sayuri Inoue Arai, Adilson Luiz Ramos
{"title":"两种 3 x 3 保持器的牙周指数:0.032 英寸 SS V 形环与 0.0215 英寸 SS 同轴--随机交叉试验。","authors":"Diogo Marques Sapata, Cléverson de Oliveira E Silva, Renata Corrêa Pascotto, Thais Maria Freire Fernandes Poleti, Maristela Sayuri Inoue Arai, Adilson Luiz Ramos","doi":"10.1590/2177-6709.28.6.e2323175.oar","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This randomized crossover trial evaluated periodontal indexes of two types of 3 x 3 retainers (a modified 0.032-in SS V-loop retainer and a conventional 0.0215-in SS coaxial wire retainer) after bonded for six months. Also, bonded failure rate, and a questionnaire about comfort, ease of cleaning and overall preference were recorded.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>15 patients were enrolled in this study who used both retainers for six months each, having a 15-day wash-out interval between each bonded retainer usage. The following periodontal index were recorded: Plaque Index (PI), Calculus Index (CI) and Gingival Index (GI). Patients answered a questionnaire to assess comfort, ease of cleaning and overall retainer-type preference. Rate of bonding failure was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>V-Loop retainer showed higher PI (P<0.05) as compared to conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire retainer. However, CI and GI presented no statistically significant differences between both types of retainers. The conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire retainer was chosen as the most comfortable (p<0.05), although no statistically significant differences were found for all other questionnaire answers. Bonding failure events were more observed in the 3x3 V-Loop retainer (p<0.002), as compared to the conventional 0.0215-in coaxial retainer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>V-Loop retainer showed higher PI (p<0.05), higher bonding failure rate and less comfortable, as compared to conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire.</p>","PeriodicalId":38720,"journal":{"name":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"28 6","pages":"e2323175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10773445/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Periodontal indexes of two types of 3 x 3 retainers: 0.032-in SS V-loop versus 0.0215-in SS coaxial - a randomized crossover trial.\",\"authors\":\"Diogo Marques Sapata, Cléverson de Oliveira E Silva, Renata Corrêa Pascotto, Thais Maria Freire Fernandes Poleti, Maristela Sayuri Inoue Arai, Adilson Luiz Ramos\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/2177-6709.28.6.e2323175.oar\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This randomized crossover trial evaluated periodontal indexes of two types of 3 x 3 retainers (a modified 0.032-in SS V-loop retainer and a conventional 0.0215-in SS coaxial wire retainer) after bonded for six months. Also, bonded failure rate, and a questionnaire about comfort, ease of cleaning and overall preference were recorded.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>15 patients were enrolled in this study who used both retainers for six months each, having a 15-day wash-out interval between each bonded retainer usage. The following periodontal index were recorded: Plaque Index (PI), Calculus Index (CI) and Gingival Index (GI). Patients answered a questionnaire to assess comfort, ease of cleaning and overall retainer-type preference. Rate of bonding failure was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>V-Loop retainer showed higher PI (P<0.05) as compared to conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire retainer. However, CI and GI presented no statistically significant differences between both types of retainers. The conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire retainer was chosen as the most comfortable (p<0.05), although no statistically significant differences were found for all other questionnaire answers. Bonding failure events were more observed in the 3x3 V-Loop retainer (p<0.002), as compared to the conventional 0.0215-in coaxial retainer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>V-Loop retainer showed higher PI (p<0.05), higher bonding failure rate and less comfortable, as compared to conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38720,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics\",\"volume\":\"28 6\",\"pages\":\"e2323175\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10773445/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.28.6.e2323175.oar\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.28.6.e2323175.oar","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:这项随机交叉试验评估了两种 3 x 3 保持器(改良的 0.032 英寸 SS V 型环保持器和传统的 0.0215 英寸 SS 同轴线保持器)粘结 6 个月后的牙周指标。此外,还记录了粘结失败率,以及关于舒适度、易清洁性和总体偏好的问卷调查。材料和方法:本研究共纳入 15 名患者,他们分别使用两种保持器 6 个月,每次使用粘结保持器之间有 15 天的冲洗间隔。记录了以下牙周指数:牙菌斑指数(PI)、结石指数(CI)和牙龈指数(GI)。患者回答了一份问卷,以评估舒适度、清洁难易度和对保持器类型的总体偏好。此外,还对粘结失败率进行了评估:结果:V-Loop 保持器显示出更高的 PI(PC 结论:V-Loop 保持器显示出更高的 PI(PC):结果:V-Loop 保持器显示出更高的 PI(PC
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Periodontal indexes of two types of 3 x 3 retainers: 0.032-in SS V-loop versus 0.0215-in SS coaxial - a randomized crossover trial.

Objective: This randomized crossover trial evaluated periodontal indexes of two types of 3 x 3 retainers (a modified 0.032-in SS V-loop retainer and a conventional 0.0215-in SS coaxial wire retainer) after bonded for six months. Also, bonded failure rate, and a questionnaire about comfort, ease of cleaning and overall preference were recorded.

Material and methods: 15 patients were enrolled in this study who used both retainers for six months each, having a 15-day wash-out interval between each bonded retainer usage. The following periodontal index were recorded: Plaque Index (PI), Calculus Index (CI) and Gingival Index (GI). Patients answered a questionnaire to assess comfort, ease of cleaning and overall retainer-type preference. Rate of bonding failure was also evaluated.

Results: V-Loop retainer showed higher PI (P<0.05) as compared to conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire retainer. However, CI and GI presented no statistically significant differences between both types of retainers. The conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire retainer was chosen as the most comfortable (p<0.05), although no statistically significant differences were found for all other questionnaire answers. Bonding failure events were more observed in the 3x3 V-Loop retainer (p<0.002), as compared to the conventional 0.0215-in coaxial retainer.

Conclusion: V-Loop retainer showed higher PI (p<0.05), higher bonding failure rate and less comfortable, as compared to conventional 0.0215-in coaxial wire.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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