Suppr超能文献

Essix保持器和Hawley保持器固位特征的比较。

Comparison of retention characteristics of Essix and Hawley retainers.

作者信息

Demir Abdullah, Babacan Hasan, Nalcacı Ruhi, Topcuoglu Tolga

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey.

出版信息

Korean J Orthod. 2012 Oct;42(5):255-62. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.255. Epub 2012 Oct 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the retention characteristics of Essix and Hawley retainers.

METHODS

Adolescents undergoing fixed appliance treatment at 2 centers were recruited for this study. Twenty-two patients (16 women and 6 men) wore Essix retainers (Essix group) while 20 (14 women and 6 men) wore Hawley retainers (Hawley group). The mean retention time was 1 year, and the mean follow-up recall time for both groups was 2 years. Two qualified dental examiners evaluated the blind patient data. Maxillary and mandibular dental casts and lateral cephalograms were analyzed at 4 stages: pretreatment (T1), post-treatment (T2), post-retention (T3), and follow-up (T4).

RESULTS

The results revealed that Essix appliances were more efficient in retaining the anterior teeth in the mandible during a 1-year retention period. The irregularity index increased in both arches in both groups after a 2-year post-retention period. The mandibular arch lengths increased during treatment and tended to return to their original value after retention in both groups; however, these changes were statistically significant only in the Hawley group. Cephalometric variables did not show any significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The retention characteristics of both Essix and Hawley retainers are similar.

摘要

目的

我们旨在比较Essix保持器和Hawley保持器的固位特征。

方法

本研究招募了在2个中心接受固定矫治器治疗的青少年。22例患者(16名女性和6名男性)佩戴Essix保持器(Essix组),而20例(14名女性和6名男性)佩戴Hawley保持器(Hawley组)。平均保持时间为1年,两组的平均随访召回时间为2年。两名合格的牙科检查人员对盲态的患者数据进行评估。在4个阶段分析上颌和下颌牙模型及头颅侧位片:治疗前(T1)、治疗后(T2)、保持后(T3)和随访(T4)。

结果

结果显示,在1年的保持期内,Essix矫治器在下颌保持前牙方面更有效。在保持后2年,两组的两个牙弓的不整齐指数均增加。两组在治疗期间下颌牙弓长度增加,保持后趋于恢复到原始值;然而,这些变化仅在Hawley组具有统计学意义。头影测量变量未显示任何显著差异。

结论

Essix保持器和Hawley保持器的固位特征相似。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0970/3495257/b54c6984c1ff/kjod-42-255-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of retention characteristics of Essix and Hawley retainers.
Korean J Orthod. 2012 Oct;42(5):255-62. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.255. Epub 2012 Oct 29.
2
Comparison of Two Retention Appliances with Respect to Clinical Effectiveness.
Turk J Orthod. 2019 Jun;32(2):72-78. doi: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2019.18045. Epub 2019 Jun 1.
3
Comparing the effects of Essix and Hawley retainers on the acoustics of speech.
Eur J Orthod. 2017 Aug 1;39(4):440-445. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjw050.
4
Computerized occlusal analysis of Essix and Hawley retainers used during the retention phase: a controlled clinical trial.
J Orofac Orthop. 2020 Sep;81(5):371-381. doi: 10.1007/s00056-020-00236-4. Epub 2020 May 29.
5
Periodontal health and compliance: A comparison between Essix and Hawley retainers.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018 Jun;153(6):852-860. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.10.025.
6
Occlusal contact area changes with different retention protocols: 1-year follow-up.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020 Apr;157(4):533-541. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.05.020.
8
Effectiveness of Different Retention Protocols in Preventing Posttreatment Relapse After Comprehensive Orthodontic Treatment.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Feb;16(Suppl 1):S510-S512. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_833_23. Epub 2024 Feb 29.

引用本文的文献

1
3
Direct 3D-Printed Orthodontic Retainers. A Systematic Review.
Children (Basel). 2023 Apr 3;10(4):676. doi: 10.3390/children10040676.
8
Evaluation of relapse with thermoplastic retainers equipped with microsensors.
Angle Orthod. 2022 May 1;92(3):340-346. doi: 10.2319/072221-578.1.
10

本文引用的文献

1
A retrospective randomized double-blind comparison study of the effectiveness of Hawley vs vacuum-formed retainers.
Angle Orthod. 2011 May;81(3):404-9. doi: 10.2319/072610-437.1. Epub 2011 Jan 24.
2
Evaluation of orthodontic treatment after 1 year of retention--a randomized controlled trial.
Eur J Orthod. 2010 Oct;32(5):542-7. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjp145. Epub 2010 Jan 15.
3
Vacuum-formed retainers more effective than Hawley retainers.
Evid Based Dent. 2009;10(2):47. doi: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6400650.
5
The effectiveness of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers: a single-center randomized controlled trial.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Dec;132(6):730-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.019.
6
Which way forward? Fixed or removable lower retainers.
Angle Orthod. 2007 Nov;77(6):954-9. doi: 10.2319/103106-449.1.
7
Cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction: Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers.
Eur J Orthod. 2007 Aug;29(4):372-8. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm039.
8
Occlusal contacts with different retention procedures in 1-year follow-up period.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Mar;131(3):357-62. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.05.052.
9
Orthodontic retention: a systematic review.
J Orthod. 2006 Sep;33(3):205-12. doi: 10.1179/146531205225021624.
10
Short-term effects of fiberotomy on relapse of anterior crowding.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000 Dec;118(6):617-23. doi: 10.1067/mod.2000.110637.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验