Affiliation:
1. SİNOP ÜNİVERSİTESİ
2. Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı
3. ZONGULDAK BÜLENT ECEVİT ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Abstract
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.
Publisher
Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi
Reference26 articles.
1. 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. 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. 3. Amasyali M, Uysal T. Lingual ortodonti. Cumhuriyet Dent J. 2009;12(1):67-77.
4. 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. 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.