Kadıoğlu Merve Berika, Çakmak Berrak, Altunal Ezgi Kardelen, Rübendiz Meliha
Ankara University Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics, Ankara, Turkey.
Turk J Orthod. 2023 Jun 22;36(2):101-110. doi: 10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2022.2021.0238.
The aim of this study was to evaluate orthodontic treatment method preferences among dentistry students, dentists and orthodontic residents taking into account factors such as esthetics, advantage/disadvantage, cost and treatment duration.
The study was carried out on three groups: dentistry students (n=318), dentists (n=110) and orthodontic residents (n=98), and a 17-question survey was applied. Questionnaire forms included informational photos of conventional metal brackets (CMB), esthetic ceramic brackets (ECB), self-ligating brackets (SLB), clear aligner (CA), and lingual brackets (LB). The participants' preferences for orthodontic treatment methods were evaluated using chi-square analysis, not only between groups but also considering gender and income level.
Regarding esthetics, dentists (41%) and orthodontic residents (78%) mostly preferred CA, while dentistry students mostly preferred LB (44%). With regard to advantage/disadvantage, dentistry students (31%) and dentists (39%) mostly preferred SLB, while orthodontic residents mostly preferred CA (55%). Regarding the success of the treatment, all three groups mostly preferred CMB. (respectively 50%; 47%; 72%). While CA was mostly preferred for short-term treatments in all three groups (respectively 40%; 71%; 88%), CMB was mostly preferred for long-term treatments (respectively 35%, 51%, 55%). Gender and income-level differences had little effect on orthodontic treatment method preferences.
Except for long-term treatments and treatment success, there was generally great interest in CA, especially among orthodontic residents. Ceramic brackets and LB were generally the least preferred treatment methods among dentistry students, dentists, and orthodontic residents.
本研究旨在考虑美观、优缺点、成本和治疗时长等因素,评估牙科专业学生、牙医和正畸住院医师对正畸治疗方法的偏好。
该研究针对三组人群开展:牙科专业学生(n = 318)、牙医(n = 110)和正畸住院医师(n = 98),并应用了一份包含17个问题的调查问卷。问卷表格中包含传统金属托槽(CMB)、美观陶瓷托槽(ECB)、自锁托槽(SLB)、透明矫治器(CA)和舌侧托槽(LB)的信息图片。使用卡方分析评估参与者对正畸治疗方法的偏好,不仅在组间进行比较,还考虑了性别和收入水平。
在美观方面,牙医(41%)和正畸住院医师(78%)大多偏好透明矫治器,而牙科专业学生大多偏好舌侧托槽(44%)。在优缺点方面,牙科专业学生(31%)和牙医(39%)大多偏好自锁托槽,而正畸住院医师大多偏好透明矫治器(55%)。在治疗成功率方面,所有三组大多偏好传统金属托槽(分别为50%;47%;72%)。虽然在所有三组中,透明矫治器在短期治疗中大多被偏好(分别为40%;71%;88%),但传统金属托槽在长期治疗中大多被偏好(分别为35%、51%、55%)。性别和收入水平差异对正畸治疗方法偏好影响不大。
除了长期治疗和治疗成功率外,人们普遍对透明矫治器兴趣浓厚,尤其是正畸住院医师。陶瓷托槽和舌侧托槽通常是牙科专业学生、牙医和正畸住院医师中最不被偏好的治疗方法。