Difference in acceptance and satisfaction perception on the use of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers among post-orthodontic patients

IF 0.5 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE APOS Trends in Orthodontics Pub Date : 2024-07-05 DOI:10.25259/apos_60_2024
Krisnawati E Tarman, F. Jazaldi, Andina Alia Latief, B. Soegiharto
{"title":"Difference in acceptance and satisfaction perception on the use of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers among post-orthodontic patients","authors":"Krisnawati E Tarman, F. Jazaldi, Andina Alia Latief, B. Soegiharto","doi":"10.25259/apos_60_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nIt has been observed that using a retainer during the retention phase of orthodontic treatment can result in various patient perceptions; however, only limited research exists concerning it. Therefore, the present research studies and analyzes the differences in acceptance and satisfaction perception between patients who use two types of removable retainers: Hawley retainers (HRs) and vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs).\n\n\n\nThis research comprised 80 participants (n per group = 40). Eligible individuals who had finished treatment between 6 months and 5-years-prior and met the inclusion criteria were contacted to partake in this study. The participants were asked to complete a digital-based questionnaire consisting of seven questions. Each patient was asked the questions twice, once for maxillary and once for mandibular retainers. The visual analog scale was used to measure their responses. Blinding was implemented to minimize potential bias during data analysis.\n\n\n\nStatistically significant differences were found in the speaking ability and positive comments received with maxillary retainer in place. Statistically significant differences were not found in the perception of adaptation, cleaning ability, negative comments received, and overall retainers’ acceptance and patients’ satisfaction with both retainers in place, as well as the speaking ability and positive comments received with the mandibular retainer. During the study, no harm was observed in any of the patients.\n\n\n\nVFRs cause less speech difficulty and elicit more positive comments on the maxilla than HRs. No significant differences were found between HRs and VFRs concerning the perception of adaptation, cleaning ability, negative comments received, and overall retainers’ acceptance and patients’ satisfaction with both retainers in place. Moreover, no differences were found between patients’ speaking ability and positive comments received with the mandibular retainer.\n","PeriodicalId":42593,"journal":{"name":"APOS Trends in Orthodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"APOS Trends in Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/apos_60_2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It has been observed that using a retainer during the retention phase of orthodontic treatment can result in various patient perceptions; however, only limited research exists concerning it. Therefore, the present research studies and analyzes the differences in acceptance and satisfaction perception between patients who use two types of removable retainers: Hawley retainers (HRs) and vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs). This research comprised 80 participants (n per group = 40). Eligible individuals who had finished treatment between 6 months and 5-years-prior and met the inclusion criteria were contacted to partake in this study. The participants were asked to complete a digital-based questionnaire consisting of seven questions. Each patient was asked the questions twice, once for maxillary and once for mandibular retainers. The visual analog scale was used to measure their responses. Blinding was implemented to minimize potential bias during data analysis. Statistically significant differences were found in the speaking ability and positive comments received with maxillary retainer in place. Statistically significant differences were not found in the perception of adaptation, cleaning ability, negative comments received, and overall retainers’ acceptance and patients’ satisfaction with both retainers in place, as well as the speaking ability and positive comments received with the mandibular retainer. During the study, no harm was observed in any of the patients. VFRs cause less speech difficulty and elicit more positive comments on the maxilla than HRs. No significant differences were found between HRs and VFRs concerning the perception of adaptation, cleaning ability, negative comments received, and overall retainers’ acceptance and patients’ satisfaction with both retainers in place. Moreover, no differences were found between patients’ speaking ability and positive comments received with the mandibular retainer.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
正畸后患者对使用霍利保持器和真空成型保持器的接受程度和满意度的差异
据观察,在正畸治疗的保持阶段使用保持器会导致患者产生不同的看法;然而,相关研究却非常有限。因此,本研究对使用两种可摘保持器的患者在接受度和满意度方面的差异进行了研究和分析:本研究共有 80 名参与者(每组 40 人)。我们联系了在 6 个月至 5 年前完成治疗并符合纳入标准的符合条件的人参与这项研究。研究人员要求参与者填写一份由七个问题组成的数字化问卷。每位患者都被问了两次问题,一次针对上颌保持器,一次针对下颌保持器。采用视觉模拟量表来测量他们的回答。在上颌保持器安装后,患者的说话能力和获得的积极评价在统计学上有显著差异,而在下颌保持器安装后,患者的说话能力和获得的积极评价在统计学上没有显著差异。在适应感、清洁能力、收到的负面评价、保持器的总体接受度和患者对两种保持器的满意度方面,以及在下颌保持器的说话能力和收到的正面评价方面,均未发现明显的统计学差异。在研究过程中,没有观察到任何患者受到伤害。与HR相比,VFR造成的言语困难较小,对上颌骨的正面评价较多。在适应感、清洁能力、收到的负面评论、保持器的总体接受度以及患者对两种保持器的满意度方面,HR 和 VFR 之间没有发现明显的差异。此外,在下颌保持器方面,患者的说话能力和收到的好评之间也没有发现差异。
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 去求助
来源期刊
APOS Trends in Orthodontics
APOS Trends in Orthodontics DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
期刊最新文献
Comparison of coating stability and surface characterization of different esthetic NiTi arch wires – An in vivo study Accelerated and hybrid orthodontic treatment using a combination of 2D lingual appliance and in-house aligner: An anterior cross-bite and TMD case report after 1-year follow-up The perception of facial esthetics with regard to different buccal corridors and facial proportions Clinical effect of low-level laser therapy on pain perception after placement of initial orthodontic archwires Orthodontic treatment of a patient with pycnodysostosis
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1