Lingual ve Labial Sabit Ortodontik Aygıtların Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması: Retrospektif Çalışma
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, lingual ve labial sabit ortodontik aygıtların hasta konforu ve günlük yaşam üzerindeki etkilerini karşılaştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Toplam 30 hasta, aygıt tipine göre iki grup olarak değerlendirildi. Grup 1’de 9 kadın, 6 erkek toplam 15 hastaya lingual braket, Grup 2’de 8 kadın ve 7 erkek toplam 15 hastaya labial braket uygulandı. Tüm hastaların 1. gün (T0) 7. gün (T1) ve 14. günlerde oldurulan anket formları değerlendirildi. Ağrı düzeyi, konuşma güçlüğü, dil travması, yeme güçlüğü, fırçalama üçlüğü, dişlerdeki düzelmenin ilk farkedilme zamanı, sosyal çevre tepkisi, tedavi memnuniyeti ve tedavi gerekliliği parametreleri anket formlarındaki 1’den 10’a kadar puanlanan değerlere göre incelendi. Verilerin istatistiksel analizleri tek yönlü Anova, Welch’in t-testi ve eşleştirilmiş örneklem t-testi ile yapıldı.
Bulgular: T0 döneminde ağrı düzeyi ve fırçalama güçlüğü açısından gruplar arasında anlamlı fark bulunmazken (p>0,05), Grup 1’in konuşma güçlüğü, dil travması ve yeme güçlüğü değerleri Grup 2’ye göre daha yüksek bulundu (p<0,05). Ağrı düzeyi ve konuşma güçlüğü açısından T0-T1, T0-T2 ve T1-T2
dönemleri arasında anlamlı düşüşler gözlendi (p<0,05). Sonuç: Lingual braketler özellikle tedavinin ilk günlerinde daha fazla dil travmasına, konuşma ve yeme güçlüğüne neden oldu. Her iki apareyde de rahatsızlıkların zamanla azaldığı görüldü.
Anahtar Kelimeler:
Lingual ortodonti, Labial ortodonti, Anket, Karşılaştırma
Comparison the Effects of Lingual and Labial Fixed Orthodontic Appliances: A Retrospective Study
Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the effects of lingual and labial orthodontic appliances on patient comfort and daily life.
Materials and Methods: A total of 30 patients, according to appliance type, two groups were considered. Lingual brackets were used with respect to total of 15 patients including 9 girls and 6 boys for Group 1 and labial brackets were taken into account for 15 patients with 8 girls and 7 boys for Group 2. Questionnaire forms filled in the T0(1st day), T1(7th day) and T2(14th day) periods of all patients were evaluated. Parameters related to pain level, speech difficulty, tongue trauma, eating difficulty, brushing difficulty, time to first notice of aligning in teeth, social environment reaction, treatment satisfaction and necessity of treatment were examined according to the values marked on a scale from 1 to 10 in the questionnaire forms. Statistical analyzes were performed with one-way Anova, Welch's t-test and paired-sample t-test.
Results: While there was no significant difference in pain level and brushing difficulty in T0 between the groups(p> 0.05), speech difficulties, tongue trauma and eating difficulties were significantly higher in Group 1 than Group 2(p< 0.05). Significant decrease were observed in pain level, and difficulty in speaking, eating and brushing at T0-T1, T0-T2 and T1-T2 periods(p< 0.05).
Conclusion: Lingual brackets caused more speech, tongue trauma and eating difficulties, especially in the first days of treatment. It was observed that the discomforts caused by both appliances were decreased over time.
Keywords:
Lingual ortodonti, Labial ortodonti, Anket, Karşılaştırma,
___
- 1. Behnaz M, Farahnaki A, Rahimipour K, Mousavi R, Davoodi NS. Lingual Orthodontic Treatment: Efficacy and Complications. J Advanced Oral Res. 2019;10(2):65-74.
- 2. Rosvall MD, Fields HW, Ziuchkovski J, Rosenstiel SF, Johnston WM. Attractiveness, acceptability, and value of orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2009;135(3):276. e1-. e12.
- 3. Amasyali M, Uysal T. Lingual ortodonti. Cumhuriyet Dent J. 2009;12(1):67-77.
- 4. Favale ML, Fusco R, Lesti M, Horodynski M, Toni B. Lingual vs. Labial fixed orthodontic appliances: comparison of adverse effects. WebmedCentralcom. 2017:5 pages.
- 5. Haj-Younis S, Khattab TZ, Hajeer MY, Farah H. A comparison between two lingual orthodontic brackets in terms of speech performance and patients’ acceptance in correcting Class II, Division 1 malocclusion: a randomized controlled trial. Dental Press J Orthod. 2016;21(4):80-8.
- 6. Hohoff A, Seifert E, Fillion D, Stamm T, Heinecke A, Ehmer U. Speech performance in lingual orthodontic patients measured by sonagraphy and auditive analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2003;123(2):146-52.
- 7. Nassif CE, Cotrim-Ferreira A, Conti ACCF, Valarelli DP, de Almeida Cardoso M, de Almeida-Pedrin RR. Comparative study of root resorption of maxillary incisors in patients treated with lingual and buccal orthodontics. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(6):795-800.
- 8. Deguchi T, Terao F, Aonuma T, Kataoka T, Sugawara Y, Yamashiro T, et al. Outcome assessment of lingual and labial appliances compared with cephalometric analysis, peer assessment rating, and objective grading system in Angle Class II extraction cases. Angle Orthod. 2015;85(3):400-7.
- 9. Papageorgiou SN, Gölz L, Jäger A, Eliades T, Bourauel C. Lingual vs. labial fixed orthodontic appliances: systematic review and meta‐analysis of treatment effects. Eur J Oral Sci. 2016;124(2):105-18.
- 10. Cline ME, Herman J, Shaw ER, Morton RD. Standardization of the visual analogue scale. Nursing Res. 1992;41(6):378-80.
- 11. Abdulmajed, A. Erişkin hastalarda direkt lingual ve labiyal ortodontik tedavi etkilerinin, hasta konforunun ve memnuniyetinin karşılaştırılarak incelenmesi. Doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara 2010.
- 12. Yeşil Şahin, E. İndirekt lingual ortodonti ve şeffaf plak teknikleriyle yapılan ortodontik tedavilerde hasta konforu, memnuniyeti, tedavi etkileri ve tedavi süresinin karşılaştırılması. Doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara 2015.
- 13. Feu D, de Oliveira BH, de Oliveira Almeida MA, Kiyak HA, Miguel JAM. Oral health-related quality of life and orthodontic treatment seeking. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010;138(2):152-9.
- 14. Hardwick LJ, Sayers MS, Newton JT. Patient’s expectations of lingual orthodontic treatment: a qualitative study. J Orthod. 2017;44(1):21-7.
- 15. Chow J, Cioffi I. Pain and orthodontic patient compliance: a clinical perspective. Seminars in Orthod. 2018;24(2):242-7.
- 16. Billaiya P, Amin V, Begum M. Assessment of efficacy (Time taken during stage I and pain perception) of customized lingual orthodontic system. Int J App Dent Sci. 2019;5(3):234-9.
- 17. Tecco S, D’Attilio M, Tetè S, Festa F. Prevalence and type of pain during conventional and self-ligating orthodontic reatment. Eur J Orthod. 2009;31(4):380-4.
- 18. Wu AK, McGrath C, Wong RW, Wiechmann D, M. Rabie AB. A comparison of pain experienced by patients treated with labial and lingual orthodontic appliances. Eur J Orthod. 2010;32(4):403-7.
- 19. Rai AK, Rozario JE, Ganeshkar SV. Comparison of speech performance in labial and lingual orthodontic patients: A prospective study. Dent Res J. 2014;11(6):663-75.
- 20. Khattab TZ, Farah H, Al-Sabbagh R, Hajeer MY, Haj-Hamed Y. Speech performance and oral impairments with lingual and labial orthodontic appliances in the first stage of fixed treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod. 2013;83(3):519-26.
- 21. Caniklioglu C, Öztürk Y. Patient discomfort: a comparison between lingual and labial fixed appliances. Angle Orthod. 2005;75(1):86-91.
- 22. Shalish M, Cooper-Kazaz R, Ivgi I, Canetti L, Tsur B, Bachar E, et al. Adult patients’ adjustability to orthodontic appliances. Part I: a comparison between Labial, Lingual, and Invisalign™. Eur J Orthod. 2012;34(6):724-30.
- 23. Rakhshan H, Rakhshan V. Pain and discomfort perceived during the initial stage of active fixed orthodontic treatment. Saudi Dent J. 2015;27(2):81-7.
- 24. Ali SJ, Sasanka LK, Ramanadhan V, Ganapathy D. Orthodontics and Smile Correction in Teenagers-A Survey. Indian J Forensic Med & Tox. 2020;14(4):5486-93.
- 25. Lee R, Hwang S, Lim H, Cha J-Y, Kim K-H, Chung CJ. Treatment satisfaction and its influencing factors among adult orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2018;153(6):808-17.
- 26. Wu A, McGrath C, Wong R. W. K., Wiechmann D., and Rabie A. B. M. Comparison of oral impacts experienced by patients treated with labial or customized lingual fixed orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011;139(6):784-90.
- Başlangıç: 2022
- Yayıncı: Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler
Meryem KAYGISIZ YİĞİT, Rıdvan AKYOL, Beyza YALVAÇ, Fatma DİLEK, Emin Murat CANGER
Dijital Tam Protezlerin Üretiminde Kullanılan Sistemler
Çağla Nur GEDİKLİ, Tayfun BİLGİN
Ellis-van Creveld Sendromunda Oral Bulgular
Ayşe ZENGİN, Peruze ÇELENK, Birgül MUTLU
Mustafa ŞİMŞEKYILMAZ, Taner ARABACI, Elif BİLİCİ, Beyza Nur ŞAHİN
Lingual ve Labial Sabit Ortodontik Aygıtların Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması: Retrospektif Çalışma