Evaluation of efficacy of different types of retainers post orthodontic treatment
An original research
Keywords:
retainers, relapse, malocclusion, orthodonticsAbstract
Aim: Purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of 3 different types of retainers (Hawley removable, Essix removable and Fixed) of the mandibular and maxillary anterior sextant and to assess patient perception of crowding. Methodology: A retrospective study of 80 patients was carried out for a time period of 1-2 years into retention. E models (digital models) were assessed pre- and post-orthodontically using Little’s Irregularity Index. The amount of Irregularity was compared for 3 retention groups (Hawley, Essix and Fixed). Relapse was also subjectively measured. Results: Increase in the Irregularity Index of the mandibular incisors was observed after wearing Hawley retainers, including crowding which was significantly more than patients with Fixed retainers. Conclusion: Hawley retainers allow for more mandibular incisor movement rather than the Fixed retainers.
Downloads
References
Case CS. Principles of retention in orthodontia. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003 Oct;124(4):352–361. DOI: 10.1016/S0889- 5406(03)00541-9.
Tweed CH. Clinical Orthodontics. St. Louis: Mosby; 1966. vol. 1 and 2.
Angle EA. Treatment of malocclusion of teeth, 7th ed. Philadelphia: SS White Manufacturing Co.; 1907.
Hawley CA. A removable retainer. Int J Orthod 1919;2:291–298. DOI: 10.1016/S1072-348X(19)80039-6.
Kneirim RW. Invisible lower cuspid to cuspid retainer. Angle Orthod 1973;43:218–219.
Thickett E, Power S. A randomized clinical trial of thermoplastic retainer wear. Eur J Orthod 2010;32:1–5. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjp061.
Jäderberg S, Feldmann I, et al. Removable thermoplastic appliances as orthodontic retainers—a prospective study of different wear regimens. Eur J Orthod 2012;34:475–479. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjr040.
Hichens L, Rowland H, et al. Cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction: Hawley and vacuum formed retainers. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:372–378. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjm039.
Rowland H, Hichens L. The effectiveness of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers: a single-center randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2007;132:730–737. DOI: 10.1016/ j.ajodo.2006.06.019.
Artun J, Spadafora AT, et al. A 3-year follow-up of various types of orthodontic canine-to-canine retainers. Eur J Orthod 1997;19: 501–509. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/19.5.501.
Mai W, He J, et al. Comparison of vacuum-formed and Hawley retiners: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2014;145:720–727. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.01.019.
O’Rourke N, Albeedh H, et al. Effectiveness of bonded and vacuum-formed retainer: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;150(3):406–415. DOI: 10.1016/ j.ajodo.2016.03.020.
Ramazanzadeh B, Ahrari F, et al. The retention characteristics of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainerswith different retention protocols. J Clin Exp Dent 2018 Mar;10(3):e224–e231. DOI: 10.4317/jced.54511.
Jin C, Bennani F, et al. Survival analysis of orthodontic retainers. Eur J Orthod 2018 Sep 28;40(5):531–536. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjx100.
Segner D, Heinrici B. Bonded retainers—clinical reliability. J Orofac Orthop 2000;61:352–358. DOI: 10.1007/PL00001905.
Artun J, Urbye KS. The effect of orthodontic treatment on periodontal bone support in patients with advanced loss of marginal periodontium. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1988;93:143–148. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(88)90292-2.
Dahl EH, Zachrisson BU. Long-term experience with direct-bonded lingual retainers. J Clin Orthod 1991;25:919–932.
Zachrisson BU. Long term experience with direct-bonded retainers: update and clinical advice. J Clin Orthod 2007;41:728–737.
Patel A, Farhad, B, et al. Bonded Orthodontic Retainers. Ortho Update 2013;6:70–77. DOI: 10.12968/ortu.2013.6.3.70.
Stormann I, Ehmer U. A prospective randomized study of different retainer types. J Orofac Orthop 2002;63:42–50. DOI: 10.1007/s00056- 002-0040-6.
McDermott P, Field D, et al. Operator and Patient Experiences with Fixed or Vacuum Formed Retainers. Cork: International Association of Dental Research, 2007; 17 abstract.
Sun J, Yu YC, et al. Survival time comparison between Hawley and Clear Overlay Retainers: a Randomized Trial. J Dent Res 2011;90(10):1197–1201. DOI: 10.1177/0022034511415274.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2022 International journal of health sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS) are available under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Authors retain copyright in their work and grant IJHS right of first publication under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles in this journal, and to use them for any other lawful purpose.
Articles published in IJHS can be copied, communicated and shared in their published form for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given to the author and the journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
This copyright notice applies to articles published in IJHS volumes 4 onwards. Please read about the copyright notices for previous volumes under Journal History.
