MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.10.021

Медицинская библиотека · American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2023

Conventional and self-ligating lingual orthodontic treatment outcomes in Class I nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System.

Sezici Yağmur Lena, Önçağ Mehmet Gökhan

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to assess and compare the duration and outcomes of orthodontic treatment with conventional and self-ligating lingual fixed appliances with the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) Objective Grading System.

METHODS

Thirty consecutive patients with a complete dentition and Angle Class I malocclusion treated with a conventional lingual bracket system (STb; Ormco, Glendora, Calif) or self-ligating lingual bracket system (GC Experience-L; GC Orthodontics, Breckerfeld, Germany) were included. The occlusal outcome was assessed with the ABO instrument. The treatment duration and ABO scores of the 2 groups were recorded. Statistical analyses were evaluated using independent-sample t tests.

RESULTS

The conventional group had a mean treatment time of 2.10 ± 0.69 years, and the self-ligating group had a treatment duration of 1.68 ± 0.48 years (P >0.05). The mean posttreatment ABO scores in the conventional group were 20.23 ± 5.13, and the mean posttreatment ABO scores in the self-ligating group were 21.00 ± 5.66. No difference was found between the groups regarding the criteria of ABO (P >0.05). The highest scores were given in the assessment of buccolingual inclinations in both conventional and self-ligating lingual bracket groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The design of the lingual appliances used in this study did not influence the treatment duration and the total ABO scores in treating patients with a Class I relationship in this sample. Both types of lingual brackets were especially deficient in correcting buccolingual inclinations. The strengths were their ability to close spaces and correct anterior rotations and overjet regardless of the bracket types.

Для цитирования: Sezici Yağmur Lena, Önçağ Mehmet Gökhan. Conventional and self-ligating lingual orthodontic treatment outcomes in Class I nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System.. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.10.021.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.