Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Dental Institute, RIMS, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India.
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Dental Institute, RIMS, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India, Phone: +91 9955393983, e-mail:
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2022 May 1;23(5):508-512.
To scrutinize Kesling and elastomeric orthodontic separators, focusing on the separating effect as well as patients' perception of pain together with discomfort.
The separators tested were elastomeric as well as Kesling separators. Thirty subjects, scheduled for treatment having a fixed orthodontic appliance, were categorized into two groups. In group I subjects, elastomeric separators were placed, whereas in group II subjects, Kesling separators were placed. After 3 days, the extent of separation was recorded with a leaf gauge. A questionnaire of eight questions and visual analog scale were used to note the patient perceptions of pain and discomfort.
The mean separation formed by elastomeric and Kesling separator was 0.0457 and 0.0437 mm, respectively, of which elastomeric separator had made highest separation than the other separator used for the generation of separation at day 1 whereas the mean separation created by the elastomeric and Kesling separator at day 2 was 0.2327 mm and 0.1903 mm, respectively. 46.7% of patients on day 1, and on day 2, 56.7% of patients reported discomfort but not pain, while 73.3% of patients on day 3 reported discomfort but not pain from both types of separator. On day 1, 6.7% of patients, 13.3% on day 2, and 6.7% again on day 3 reported feeling pressure but no pain or discomfort.
Elastomeric separators exhibited the highest separation compared to Kesling used for the separation, at all three days. The Kesling separator was a separator of choice in cases where the interproximal contact was tight.
Discomfort and pain due to separator will be minimized by reducing the duration of separator placement. Hence treatment acceptability will be more. There is no significant difference found in separation by increasing the day.
研究 Kesling 和弹性正畸分离器，重点关注分离效果以及患者的疼痛和不适感知。
测试的分离器为弹性分离器和 Kesling 分离器。将 30 名计划接受固定正畸治疗的患者分为两组。在组 I 中，将弹性分离器放置，而在组 II 中，将 Kesling 分离器放置。3 天后，使用叶规记录分离程度。使用 8 个问题的问卷和视觉模拟量表来记录患者的疼痛和不适感知。
弹性分离器和 Kesling 分离器形成的平均分离分别为 0.0457 和 0.0437 毫米，其中弹性分离器在第 1 天产生的分离量最大，而弹性分离器和 Kesling 分离器在第 2 天产生的分离量分别为 0.2327 和 0.1903 毫米。第 1 天有 46.7%的患者和第 2 天有 56.7%的患者报告不适但无疼痛，而第 3 天有 73.3%的患者报告两种分离器均有不适但无疼痛。第 1 天有 6.7%的患者、第 2 天有 13.3%的患者和第 3 天再次有 6.7%的患者报告有压力感但无疼痛或不适。
弹性分离器在所有 3 天内比 Kesling 分离器产生的分离量更高。在邻面接触紧密的情况下，Kesling 分离器是一种更好的分离器选择。
通过减少分离器的放置时间，可以最大限度地减少因分离器引起的不适和疼痛。因此，治疗的可接受性将更高。在增加天数方面，没有发现分离的显著差异。
