计算机辅助评估两种不同装置在减轻下牙拥挤方面的应用。

IF 1.7 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Sara Di Nicolantonio, Maria Ausilia D'Angelo, Davide Pietropaoli, Annalisa Monaco, Eleonora Ortu
{"title":"计算机辅助评估两种不同装置在减轻下牙拥挤方面的应用。","authors":"Sara Di Nicolantonio, Maria Ausilia D'Angelo, Davide Pietropaoli, Annalisa Monaco, Eleonora Ortu","doi":"10.3390/clinpract14030094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Lower tooth crowding is considered one of the most common malocclusions in growing patients and due to the potential complications associated with it, it is recommended to intercept this condition as soon as possible. The purpose of this paper is to examine and compare the effectiveness of two different orthodontic devices (elastodontic device and clear aligners) in the treatment of anterior tooth crowding in the jaws of young patients.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seventy patients aged between 10 and 16 years with anterior inferior tooth crowding were recruited into this study and divided into case and control groups. The former group comprised 35 patients (15 males and 20 females, average age 10.2 years) who were treated with elastodontic devices (EQ CP series, Eptamed), while the control group consisted of 35 patients (15 males and 20 females, average age 10.5 years) who received aligners (Invisalign). All patients underwent periodic visits after 6 months from the start of treatment (T1) and after 1 year (T2) in which the progress of therapy was evaluated by measuring the inferior intercanine distance using a digital caliper. A parametric ANOVA test was conducted for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups at either T1 or T2 (<i>p</i> < 0.05), thus making the two treatment modalities comparable.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both elastodontic devices and aligners can be considered as effective tools to successfully conduct inferior expansive treatment for the resolution of tooth crowding; however, the elastodontic devices are considered more comfortable to wear and they are required to be worn for less time during the day.</p>","PeriodicalId":45306,"journal":{"name":"Clinics and Practice","volume":"14 3","pages":"1185-1195"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11202813/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Computer-Guided Evaluation of the Use of Two Different Devices in the Reduction of Inferior Tooth Crowding.\",\"authors\":\"Sara Di Nicolantonio, Maria Ausilia D'Angelo, Davide Pietropaoli, Annalisa Monaco, Eleonora Ortu\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/clinpract14030094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Lower tooth crowding is considered one of the most common malocclusions in growing patients and due to the potential complications associated with it, it is recommended to intercept this condition as soon as possible. The purpose of this paper is to examine and compare the effectiveness of two different orthodontic devices (elastodontic device and clear aligners) in the treatment of anterior tooth crowding in the jaws of young patients.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seventy patients aged between 10 and 16 years with anterior inferior tooth crowding were recruited into this study and divided into case and control groups. The former group comprised 35 patients (15 males and 20 females, average age 10.2 years) who were treated with elastodontic devices (EQ CP series, Eptamed), while the control group consisted of 35 patients (15 males and 20 females, average age 10.5 years) who received aligners (Invisalign). All patients underwent periodic visits after 6 months from the start of treatment (T1) and after 1 year (T2) in which the progress of therapy was evaluated by measuring the inferior intercanine distance using a digital caliper. A parametric ANOVA test was conducted for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups at either T1 or T2 (<i>p</i> < 0.05), thus making the two treatment modalities comparable.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both elastodontic devices and aligners can be considered as effective tools to successfully conduct inferior expansive treatment for the resolution of tooth crowding; however, the elastodontic devices are considered more comfortable to wear and they are required to be worn for less time during the day.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinics and Practice\",\"volume\":\"14 3\",\"pages\":\"1185-1195\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11202813/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinics and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/clinpract14030094\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/clinpract14030094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:下牙拥挤被认为是生长期患者最常见的畸形之一,由于其潜在的并发症,建议尽快阻断这种情况。本文旨在研究和比较两种不同的正畸装置(弹性正畸装置和透明矫治器)在治疗年轻患者颌骨前牙拥挤中的效果:本研究招募了70名年龄在10至16岁之间的前下牙拥挤患者,并将其分为病例组和对照组。病例组包括35名患者(男性15名,女性20名,平均年龄10.2岁),他们接受了弹性矫治器(EQ CP系列,Eptamed)治疗;对照组包括35名患者(男性15名,女性20名,平均年龄10.5岁),他们接受了矫治器(隐适美)治疗。所有患者在治疗开始 6 个月后(T1)和 1 年后(T2)接受定期复诊,复诊时使用数字卡尺测量下齿间距离,评估治疗进展。统计分析采用参数方差分析:结果:两组患者在 T1 或 T2 阶段均无统计学差异(P < 0.05),因此两种治疗方式具有可比性:弹性正畸装置和矫正器都可被视为成功进行下扩式治疗以解决牙齿拥挤问题的有效工具;不过,弹性正畸装置被认为佩戴更舒适,而且白天佩戴的时间更短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Computer-Guided Evaluation of the Use of Two Different Devices in the Reduction of Inferior Tooth Crowding.

Objective: Lower tooth crowding is considered one of the most common malocclusions in growing patients and due to the potential complications associated with it, it is recommended to intercept this condition as soon as possible. The purpose of this paper is to examine and compare the effectiveness of two different orthodontic devices (elastodontic device and clear aligners) in the treatment of anterior tooth crowding in the jaws of young patients.

Materials and methods: Seventy patients aged between 10 and 16 years with anterior inferior tooth crowding were recruited into this study and divided into case and control groups. The former group comprised 35 patients (15 males and 20 females, average age 10.2 years) who were treated with elastodontic devices (EQ CP series, Eptamed), while the control group consisted of 35 patients (15 males and 20 females, average age 10.5 years) who received aligners (Invisalign). All patients underwent periodic visits after 6 months from the start of treatment (T1) and after 1 year (T2) in which the progress of therapy was evaluated by measuring the inferior intercanine distance using a digital caliper. A parametric ANOVA test was conducted for statistical analysis.

Results: There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups at either T1 or T2 (p < 0.05), thus making the two treatment modalities comparable.

Conclusions: Both elastodontic devices and aligners can be considered as effective tools to successfully conduct inferior expansive treatment for the resolution of tooth crowding; however, the elastodontic devices are considered more comfortable to wear and they are required to be worn for less time during the day.

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
Clinics and Practice
Clinics and Practice MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
91
审稿时长
10 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