MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.10.032

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 · 2017

Stability of orthodontic treatment outcome in relation to retention status: An 8-year follow-up.

Steinnes Jeanett, Johnsen Gunn, Kerosuo Heidi

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

INTRODUCTION

Our aim was to evaluate the stability of orthodontic treatment outcome and retention status 7 or more years after active treatment in relation to posttreatment or postretention time, type of retention appliance, and duration of retainer use.

METHODS

The subjects were former patients who completed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances from 2000 to 2007. The pretreatment eligibility criteria were anterior crowding of 4 mm or more in the maxilla or the mandible and Angle Class I or Class II sagittal molar relationship. Acceptable pretreatment and posttreatment dental casts were required. A total of 67 patients participated, 24 men and 43 women, with a mean age of 24.7 years (range, 20.0-50.0 years). All participants had a follow-up clinical examination, which included impressions for follow-up casts, and each completed a questionnaire. Data were obtained from pretreatment, posttreatment, and follow-up (T2) casts as well as from the patients' dental records. Treatment stability was evaluated with the peer assessment rating (PAR) index and Little's irregularity index.

RESULTS

The participation rate was 64%. The average posttreatment time was 8.5 years (range, 7.0-11.0). All participants had received a retainer in the mandible, maxilla, or both after active treatment. At T2, the PAR score showed a mean relapse of 14%. The majority (78%) of participants still had a fixed retainer at T2 (retainer group), and 22% had been out of retention for at least 1 year (postretention group). The relapse according to the PAR did not differ significantly between participants with and without a retainer at T2. From posttreatment to T2, the irregularity of the mandibular incisors increased almost 3 times more in participants with no retainer in the mandible compared with those with an intact retainer at T2 (P = 0.001). In the maxilla, no corresponding difference was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that occlusal relapse can be expected after active orthodontic treatment irrespective of long-term use of fixed retainers. Fixed canine-to-canine retainers seem effective to maintain mandibular incisor alignment, whereas in the maxilla a fixed retainer may not make any difference in the long term.

Для цитирования: Steinnes Jeanett, Johnsen Gunn, Kerosuo Heidi. Stability of orthodontic treatment outcome in relation to retention status: An 8-year follow-up.. American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.10.032.

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.