Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi / Faculty of Dentistry

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/11727/2120

Browse

Filters

2021 - 20242

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.APPLIANCES

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Comparison Of The Accuracy Of Three Interproximal Reduction Methods Used In Clear Aligner Treatment
    (CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2024-01-15) Gulec-Ergun, Pelinsu; Arman-Ozcirpici, Ayca; Atakan-Kocabalkan, Azize; Tuncer, Niluefer Irem
    ObjectivesTo comparatively assess 3 interproximal reduction (IPR) methods used in clear aligner treatment with regard to accuracy, and patient perception of discomfort and anxiety.Materials and methodsA total of 42 patients, treated with the Invisalign (R) system, were included in this prospective trial and received one of the following IPR methods: hand-operated abrasive strips (group 1; 14 patients, 150 teeth), motor-driven 3/4 oscillating segmental discs (group 2; 14 patients, 134 teeth), or motor-driven abrasive strips (group 3; 14 patients, 133 teeth). Accuracy was evaluated using the difference between planned and executed IPR. Anxiety and discomfort levels experienced by the patients were evaluated using a questionnaire of 17 questions.ResultsThe accuracy of IPR was high in groups 2 and 3; however, it was low in group 1 with the executed IPR significantly less than the planned amount. On quadrant-level, executed IPR was significantly less in the upper left quadrant in group 1, and significantly more in the upper right quadrant in group 2. The difference between planned IPR and executed IPR was significant for teeth 11, 21, 32, 33, and 43 in group 1, indicating deficiency. The average difference between planned IPR and executed IPR was 0.08 mm for group 1, 0.09 mm for group 2, and 0.1 mm for group 3. Anxiety and discomfort levels did not differ between the methods, but a negative correlation was observed between age and discomfort and anxiety levels.ConclusionsThe overall accuracy of the 2 motor-driven IPR methods was found to be better than the hand-operated system. Maxillary central incisors and mandibular canines were more prone to IPR deficiency when hand-operated abrasive strips were utilized. Patients were similarly comfortable with all 3 methods, and discomfort and anxiety levels decreased with age.Clinical relevanceMotor-driven methods have proven to be more effective when compared to the hand-operated ones by means of precision, speed, and patient comfort. If the clinician favors a hand-operated method, it may be advised to perform slightly more IPR especially on mandibular canines and maxillary central incisors.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Multidisciplinary management of an adult skeletal Class III patient with generalized aggressive periodontitis and canine-premolar transposition
    (2021) Ince Bingol, Sinem; Nisanci Yilmaz, Mediha Nur; Kaya, Burcak
    This case report presents orthodontic camouflage treatment and the correction of transposed canine-first premolar teeth in a patient who presented with a skeletal Class III and familial periodontal problem. A 28-year-old female patient who was diagnosed with generalised aggressive periodontitis was treated by scaling and root planing plus the adjunctive use of systemic antibiotics and surgical therapy prior to referral to the orthodontic department. After the progression of the disease was controlled, orthodontic treatment was commenced to correct the dental transposition by using a modified Nance-TPA appliance and sectional arch mechanics. A non-extraction orthodontic camouflage treatment was planned to eliminate the anterior crossbite and to establish a proper occlusion by closing the multiple diastemata. Treatment outcomes remained stable in the 2-year follow-up period. Severe orthodontic-periodontal problems can be successfully treated by oral hygiene motivation, an interdisciplinary approach, and the selection of appropriate biomechanics.