NAGIOS: RODERIC FUNCIONANDO

The retention characteristics of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers with different retention protocols

Repositori DSpace/Manakin

IMPORTANT: Aquest repositori està en una versió antiga des del 3/12/2023. La nova instal.lació está en https://roderic.uv.es/

The retention characteristics of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers with different retention protocols

Mostra el registre parcial de l'element

dc.contributor.author Ramazanzadeh, Baratali es
dc.contributor.author Ahrari, Farzaneh es
dc.contributor.author Hosseini, Zahra-Sadat es
dc.date.accessioned 2018-05-23T09:25:48Z
dc.date.available 2018-05-23T09:25:48Z
dc.date.issued 2018 es
dc.identifier.citation Ramazanzadeh, Baratali ; Ahrari, Farzaneh ; Hosseini, Zahra-Sadat. The retention characteristics of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers with different retention protocols. En: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 10 3 2018: 224-231 es
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10550/66350
dc.description.abstract This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of two different protocols of wearing vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs) with the standard protocol of wearing Hawley retainer in maintaining the results of orthodontic treatment. This single-blind randomized clinical trial consisted of 90 patients who finished orthodontic treatment at the Department of Orthodontics of Mashhad Dental School, and required removable retainers. The participants were randomly divided into 3 groups and received the following treatments. Group 1: Hawley retainers (4 months full-time and then night-only); group 2: VFR_4M (4 months full-time and then night-only); group 3: VFR_1W (1 week full-time and then night-only). The study models were prepared after debond and at 4 and 8 months later, and intercanine width, intermolar width, arch length and the Little?s irregularity index were compared between groups. No significant differences were found in intercanine and intermolar widths between groups (P<05). Upper arch length was significantly lower in Hawley group than the two VFR groups (p<0.05), but lower arch length values were comparable. Upper irregularity index was significantly lower in two VFR groups compared to Hawley group (p<0.05), whereas in the lower jaw, only VFR_4M group showed significantly lower crowding than Hawley group (p<0.05). Both retention regimens of VFRs were more effective than Hawley retainer in maintaining arch length and tooth alignment in the upper arch. For better incisor alignment in the lower jaw, the patients should be advocated to wear VFR 4 months full-time and then at night instead of wearing Hawley retainer. es
dc.title The retention characteristics of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers with different retention protocols es
dc.type journal article es_ES
dc.subject.unesco UNESCO::CIENCIAS MÉDICAS es
dc.identifier.doi 10.4317/jced.54511 es
dc.type.hasVersion VoR es_ES

Visualització       (623.1Kb)

Aquest element apareix en la col·lecció o col·leccions següent(s)

Mostra el registre parcial de l'element

Cerca a RODERIC

Cerca avançada

Visualitza

Estadístiques