Malmö University Publications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Bondemark, Lars
Publications (10 of 105) Show all publications
Naraghi, S., Ganzer, N., Bondemark, L. & Sonesson, M. (2023). Stability of maxillary anterior teeth during retention and 1 year after removal of retention—an RCT on adolescents retained with two different bonded retainers and a vacuum-formed retainer. European Journal of Orthodontics, 45(6), 629-636
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Stability of maxillary anterior teeth during retention and 1 year after removal of retention—an RCT on adolescents retained with two different bonded retainers and a vacuum-formed retainer
2023 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 45, no 6, p. 629-636Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Maxillary bonded and removable retainers maintain teeth in correct positions following orthodontic treatment. There is insufficient evidence regarding the capacity of the retention methods to stabilize the maxillary teeth both during and after retention.

Objective: To evaluate retention capacity and 1-year post-retention changes in the irregularity of maxillary anterior teeth and single anterior tooth contact point discrepancy (CPD) of two bonded and one removable retention method.

Trial design: Three-arm parallel group single-centre randomized controlled trial.

Methods: Ninety adolescent patients treated with fixed orthodontic appliances were enrolled. After gaining informed consent, the patients were randomized in blocks of 30 by an independent person into one of three groups: A) bonded retainer 13-23; B) bonded retainer 12-22; and C) removable vacuum-formed retainer. The primary outcomes were changes in Little's irregularity index (LII) and single CPD measured on digitalized casts before retention (T1), after 2 years of retention (T2), and 1-year post-retention (T3).

Blinding: The digital casts were blinded for the outcome assessor.

Results: Data on all 90 patients were analysed according to intention-to-treat principles. Changes in LII during retention were 0.3 mm in group A, 0.6 mm in group B, and 1.0 mm in group C. No significant differences between the groups were seen (P > 0.05). Changes during post-retention were 1.1 mm in group A, 0.5 mm in group B, and 0.4 mm in group C. Group A showed more significant changes than groups B and C (P = 0.003). During the whole post-treatment period, no significant differences were shown between the groups (P > 0.05). CPD did not differ significantly between the groups at any point.

Harms: Three patients showed changes of LII over 3 mm or CPD over 2 mm during the post-retention period, and two accepted to be realigned.

Limitations: The trial was a single-centre study evaluating 1-year post-retention changes.

Conclusions: The changes were clinically insignificant during and after the retention period. Thus, all three methods showed equal retention capacity.

Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.com (NCT04616755).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2023
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-59621 (URN)10.1093/ejo/cjad020 (DOI)000980605000001 ()37119264 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85178501319 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Region Kronoberg
Available from: 2023-05-17 Created: 2023-05-17 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved
Kallunki, J., Bondemark, L. & Paulsson, L. (2022). Comparisons of costs and treatment effects-an RCT on headgear activator treatment of excessive overjet in the mixed and late mixed dentition. European Journal of Orthodontics, 44(1), 86-94, Article ID cjab026.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Comparisons of costs and treatment effects-an RCT on headgear activator treatment of excessive overjet in the mixed and late mixed dentition
2022 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 44, no 1, p. 86-94, article id cjab026Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVES: To compare the costs and treatment effects of headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet between treatments started in the mixed (MD) and late mixed dentition (LMD).

TRIAL DESIGN: Two-arm parallel-group single-centre randomized controlled trial (RCT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 56 children presenting Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet were assessed and invited to an RCT designed as intention-to-treat. The children were randomized, by an independent person not involved in the trial into two groups, treatment with headgear activator in the MD starting at the age of 9 or to treatment with a headgear activator in LMD, starting at the age of 11. The primary outcome measure was to compare the treatment costs between the two groups. Societal costs (the sum of direct and indirect costs) were calculated for successful treatments only and when unsuccessful treatments were included. Secondary outcomes were comparisons of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), dental and skeletal treatment effects, lip closure, and trauma incidence. Data collections were performed before and after treatment, corresponding to a treatment period of 2 years. Blinding was accomplished when assessing outcomes.

RESULTS: No group differences in costs were found of successful treatments or when unsuccessful treatments were included. The most pronounced treatment effects in both groups were the reduction of overjet and improved molar relation. Treatment started in MD or in LMD were equal and without significant differences regarding effects on OHRQoL, skeletal effects, lip closure, and incidence of trauma.

HARMS: No harm was observed, but 8 of 30 children (27%) in the MD and 6 of 21 children (29%) in the LMD group showed unsuccessful results.

LIMITATIONS: Costs depend on local factors and can thereby not be directly transferred to other settings. It was a single-centre trial and can thus be less generalizable.

CONCLUSIONS: Regarding costs and treatment effects, there is no difference if headgear activator treatment of excessive overjet starts in the MD or LMD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04508322.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2022
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-42476 (URN)10.1093/ejo/cjab026 (DOI)000822060100011 ()34041527 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85128244997 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-05-31 Created: 2021-05-31 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved
Sonesson, M., Naraghi, S. & Bondemark, L. (2022). Cost analysis of two types of fixed maxillary retainers and a removable vacuum-formed maxillary retainer: a randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Orthodontics, 44(2), 197-202, Article ID cjab080.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Cost analysis of two types of fixed maxillary retainers and a removable vacuum-formed maxillary retainer: a randomized controlled trial
2022 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 44, no 2, p. 197-202, article id cjab080Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: There has been an increased interest in conducting healthcare economic evaluations. Also, orthodontic treatments have gathered focus from an economic point of view, however orthodontic research seldom examines both clinical and economic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the costs of three retention methods: a bonded retainer to the maxillary four incisors, a bonded retainer to the maxillary four incisors and canines, and a removable vacuum-formed retainer (VFR) in the maxilla. The null hypothesis was that there was no difference in costs for the three types of retention methods.

TRIAL DESIGN: Three-arm, parallel group, single-centre, randomized controlled trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety adolescent patients, 54 girls and 36 boys, treated with fixed or removable retainers in the maxilla, were recruited to the study. The patients were randomized in blocks of 30, by an independent person, to one of three groups: bonded multistranded PentaOne (Masel Orthodontics) retainer 13-23, bonded multistranded PentaOne (Masel Orthodontics) retainer 12-22, and removable VFR. A cost analysis was made regarding chair time costs based on the costs per hour for the specialist in orthodontics, and material costs plus any eventual costs for repairs of the appliance. Changes in Little's irregularity index and in single contact point discrepancies (CPDs) were measured on digitalized three-dimensional study casts. Data were evaluated on an intention-to-treat basis. The analysis was performed at 2 years of retention.

RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in costs between the maxillary fixed retainers and the VFRs was found, however, the material and emergency costs were significantly higher for the VFR compared with the bonded retainers. All three retention methods showed equally effective retention capacity, and no statistically significant differences in irregularity or CPDs of the maxillary anterior teeth in the three groups was detected.

LIMITATIONS: It was a single-centre trial, and hence less generalizable. Costs depended on local factors, and consequently, cannot be directly transferred to other settings.

CONCLUSIONS: All three retention methods can be recommended when considering costs and retention capacity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04616755.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2022
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-50136 (URN)10.1093/ejo/cjab080 (DOI)000775226000010 ()35021204 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85128160250 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-02-11 Created: 2022-02-11 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved
Lucchese, A., Bondemark, L., Farronato, M., Rubini, G., Gherlone, E. F., Lo Giudice, A. & Manuelli, M. (2022). Efficacy of the Cervical Vertebral Maturation Method: A Systematic Review. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, 35(1), 55-66
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Efficacy of the Cervical Vertebral Maturation Method: A Systematic Review
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 2528-9659, Vol. 35, no 1, p. 55-66Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: The present systematic review was carried out to evaluate both qualitatively and quantitatively the effectiveness of the cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method in predicting the pubertal growth spurt.

Methods: PubMed, PMC, Scopus, SciELO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science databases were searched. The research included every article published from 1970 to June 2019, featuring the keywords: (“cervical vertebrae” OR (“cervical” AND “vertebrae”) AND (“orthodontics” OR “growth and development” OR (“growth” AND “development”) OR (“growth”). The Preferred Reporting Items for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) protocol was adopted, and quality assessments modified from the “Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology” (STROBE) and the “Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies” (STARD) were performed to conduct this systematic review.

Results: Initially, 1284 articles were found. All the articles were then examined, and 43 studies met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen articles had low-quality scores, 25 had moderate scores, and 2 had high scores. The results showed a moderate to high statistically significant correlation between the CVM and other maturation methods.

Conclusion: Overall, the CVM method can be considered an effective method and may be used with other skeletal indices for the radiographic assessment of skeletal maturity, and also to identify the growth peak in growing patients.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
AVES Publishing, 2022
Keywords
Cervical vertebrae, skeletal maturation, growth spurt, systematic review, lateral cephalograms
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-53995 (URN)10.5152/turkjorthod.2022.21003 (DOI)000841779400009 ()35370135 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85128281305 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-08-01 Created: 2022-08-01 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved
John, M. T., Omara, M., Su, N., List, T., Sekulic, S., Häggman-Henrikson, B., . . . Larsson, P. (2022). Recommendations for use and scoring of oral health impact profile versions. Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice, 22(1), Article ID 101619.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Recommendations for use and scoring of oral health impact profile versions
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice, ISSN 1532-3382, E-ISSN 1532-3390, Vol. 22, no 1, article id 101619Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: OHIP's original seven-domain structure does not fit empirical data, but a psychometrically sound and clinically more plausible structure with the four OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact has emerged. Consequently, use and scoring of available OHIP versions need to be revisited. Aim: We assessed how well the overall construct OHRQoL and its four dimensions were measured with several OHIP versions (20, 19, 14, and 5 items) to derive recommendations which instruments should be used and how to score them. Methods: Data came from the “Dimensions of OHRQoL Project” and used the project's learning sample (5,173 prosthodontic patients and general population subjects with 49-item OHIP data). We computed correlations among OHIP versions’ summary scores. Correlations between OHRQoL dimensions, on one hand, and OHIP versions’ domain scores or OHIP-5′s items, on the other hand, were also computed. OHIP use and scoring recommendations were derived for psychometrically solid but also practical OHRQoL assessment. Results: Summary scores of 5-, 14-, 19- and 49-item versions correlated highly (r = 0.91–0.98), suggesting similar OHRQoL construct measurement across versions. The OHRQoL dimensions Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact were best measured by the OHIP domain scores for Physical Disability, Physical Pain, Psychological Discomfort, and Handicap, respectively. Conclusion: Recommendations were derived which OHIP should be preferably used and how OHIP versions should be scored to capture the overall construct and the dimensions of OHRQoL. Psychometrically solid and practical OHRQoL assessment in all settings across all oral health conditions can be achieved with the 5-item OHIP. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2022
Keywords
OHIP, Oral Function, Oral health-related quality of life, Orofacial Appearance, Orofacial Pain, Psychosocial Impact
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-49018 (URN)10.1016/j.jebdp.2021.101619 (DOI)000820710900001 ()35219460 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85088389695 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-12-27 Created: 2021-12-27 Last updated: 2023-10-02Bibliographically approved
Naraghi, S., Ganzer, N., Bondemark, L. & Sonesson, M. (2021). Comparison of post-treatment changes with and without retention in adolescents treated for maxillary impacted canines: a randomised controlled trial. European Journal of Orthodontics, 43(2), 121-127, Article ID cjaa010.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Comparison of post-treatment changes with and without retention in adolescents treated for maxillary impacted canines: a randomised controlled trial
2021 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 43, no 2, p. 121-127, article id cjaa010Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: To evaluate whether retention is needed after orthodontic treatment of impacted maxillary canines.

Trial design: Two-arm parallel group single-centre randomized controlled trial.

Materials and methods: Sixty-three patients, 39 girls and 24 boys, were recruited to the study. The inclusion criteria were patients with at least one impacted or unerupted maxillary canine, and moderate irregularity of the maxillary six anterior teeth according to Little’s index (LI). After gaining informed consent from the patient and their custodians, the patients were randomized to one of two groups, i.e. to a non-retention group or a retention group. The randomization process was prepared and carried out by an independent person not involved in the trial and the randomization used blocks of 20 (10 + 10). Primary outcomes were changes in single contact point discrepancy, and LI measured on digitalized three-dimensional study casts 1-year post-treatment. The study casts were anonymized before assessment and the changes were blinded for the assessor. Data were evaluated on an intention-to-treat basis. Thus, all randomized patients were incorporated into the final analysis. In the non-retention group a 10-week interim period was used to detect patients who eventually have a relapse immediately after treatment. If so, the patient got the arch-wire reinserted. Most patients in the retention group received a vacuum-formed retainer and pretreatment spacing cases got a bonded retainer.

Results: Mean irregularity change was 0.4 mm in the retention and 1.3 mm in the non-retention group (P < 0.001). Maximum change was 2.5 mm in the retention and 3.2 mm in the non-retention group (P < 0.001). Most changes in the non-retention group occurred during the 10-week interim period. In the non-retention group, one patient developed contact point discrepancy of >2 mm during the interim period and was realigned.HarmsOne patient met the stopping guideline criteria. This patient had the arch wire reinserted for 2 months. After realignment, the patient received a retention appliance.LimitationsThe trial was a single-centre study and short-term changes were evaluated.

Conclusions: Changes between the retention and the non-retention group were statistically but not clinically significant. Since satisfactory clinical results 1-year post-treatment were found in the non-retention group, retention does not appear to be needed. The 10-week interim period was useful in detecting patients who might have a relapse immediately after treatment.

Trial registration: The trial was not registered.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2021
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-39499 (URN)10.1093/ejo/cjaa010 (DOI)000648939600001 ()32133486 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85104046910 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-01-20 Created: 2021-01-20 Last updated: 2024-02-23Bibliographically approved
Kallunki, J., Bondemark, L. & Paulsson, L. (2021). Early headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet: a randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Orthodontics, 43(6), 639-647, Article ID cjaa073.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Early headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet: a randomized controlled trial
2021 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 43, no 6, p. 639-647, article id cjaa073Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVES: To compare early headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet with untreated control subjects in terms of the primary outcomes overjet and overbite as well as the effect regarding oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), lip closure, incidence of trauma, and skeletal changes.

TRIAL DESIGN: Two-arm parallel group single-centre randomized controlled trial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 60 children (mean age 9.5 years) presenting a Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet were recruited. The trial was designed as intention-to-treat and the participants randomized by an independent person not involved in the trial to either early treatment with headgear activator or to an untreated control group (UG). Dental and skeletal variables as well as registrations of OHRQoL, lip closure, and incidence of trauma were recorded. For the treatment group, data were registered at baseline before treatment and when treatment was finished, corresponding to approximately 2 years. For the UG, registrations were made at baseline and at 11 years of age. Observers were blinded to treatment allocation when assessing outcomes.

RESULTS: Early treatment with headgear activator significantly decreased overjet and improved molar relationship when compared with untreated controls. The effects were primarily due to dentoalveolar changes. Early treatment had no evident effect regarding OHRQoL, lip closure, or incidence of trauma. Lack of cooperation resulted in unsuccessful treatments for 27% of the patients.

LIMITATIONS: The trial was a single-centre trial and can thus be less generalizable.

CONCLUSIONS: The main treatment effect of early headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet is reduction of overjet.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04508322.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2021
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-37151 (URN)10.1093/ejo/cjaa073 (DOI)000743691800005 ()33274388 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85122546518 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2020-12-07 Created: 2020-12-07 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved
John, M. T., Häggman-Henrikson, B., Sekulic, S., Stamm, T., Oghli, I., Schierz, O., . . . Visscher, C. M. (2021). Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM)—Project summary and recommendations. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 48(3), 305-307
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM)—Project summary and recommendations
Show others...
2021 (English)In: Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, E-ISSN 1365-2842, Vol. 48, no 3, p. 305-307Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact—the dimensions of oral health-related quality of life—capture dental patients’ oral health problems worldwide and regardless of whether the patient currently suffers from oral diseases or intends to prevent them in the future. Using scores for these dimensions, the project Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM) aims to provide four-dimensional oral health impact information across oral diseases and settings. In this article, project authors summarize MOM’s findings and provide recommendations about how to improve standardized oral health impact assessment. Project MOM’s systematic reviews identified four-dimensional impact information for 189 adult and 22 pediatric patient populations that were contained in 170 publications. A typical functional, pain-related, aesthetical, and psychosocial impact (on a 0-8 impact metric based on two items with a response format 0 = never, 1 = hardly ever, 2 = occasionally, 3 = fairly often, 4 = very often) was about 2 to 3 units. Project MOM provides five recommendations to improve standardized oral health impact assessment for all oral diseases in all settings. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2021
Keywords
dental patient-reported outcomes; oral health-related quality of life
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-63225 (URN)10.1111/joor.13133 (DOI)000612492700001 ()33301620 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85099848783 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2023-10-24 Created: 2023-10-24 Last updated: 2024-01-17Bibliographically approved
Sonesson, M., Al-Qabandi, F., Mansson, S., Abdulraheem, S., Bondemark, L. & Hellén-Halme, K. (2021). Orthodontic appliances and MR image artefacts: An exploratory in vitro and in vivo study using 1.5-T and 3-T scanners. Imaging Science in Dentistry, 51(1), 63-71
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Orthodontic appliances and MR image artefacts: An exploratory in vitro and in vivo study using 1.5-T and 3-T scanners
Show others...
2021 (English)In: Imaging Science in Dentistry, ISSN 2233-7822, E-ISSN 2233-7830, Vol. 51, no 1, p. 63-71Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the artefacts of 12 fixed orthodontic appliances in magnetic resonance images obtained using 1.5-T and 3-T scanners, and to evaluate different imaging sequences designed to suppress metal artefacts. Materials and Methods: In vitro, study casts of 1 adult with normal occlusion were used. Twelve orthodontic appliances were attached to the study casts and scanned. Turbo spin echo (TSE), TSE with high readout bandwidth, and TSE with view angle tilting and slice encoding for metal artefact correction were used to suppress metal artefacts. Artefacts were measured. In vivo, 6 appliances were scanned: 1) conventional stainless-steel brackets; 2) nickelfree brackets; 3) titanium brackets; 4) a Herbst appliance; 5) a fixed retainer; and 6) a rapid maxillary expander. The maxilla, mandible, nasopharynx, tongue, temporomandibular joints, and cranial base/eye globes were assessed. Scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 indicated no artefacts and minor, moderate, and major artefacts, respectively. Results: In vitro, titanium brackets and the fixed retainer created minor artefacts. In vivo, titanium brackets caused minor artefacts. Conventional stainless-steel and nickel free brackets, the fixed retainer, and the rapid maxillary expander caused major artefacts in the maxilla and mandible. Conventional stainless-steel and nickel-free brackets caused major artefacts in the eye globe (3-T). TSE with high readout bandwidth reduced image artefacts in both scanners. Conclusion: Titanium brackets, the Herbst appliance, and the fixed retainer caused minor artefacts in images of neurocranial structures (1.5-T and 3-T) when using TSE with high readout bandwidth.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Korean Academy of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology, 2021
Keywords
Artifacts, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Orthodontic Appliances, Skull
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-42095 (URN)10.5624/isd.20200199 (DOI)000634842100009 ()33828963 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85102127350 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-05-05 Created: 2021-05-05 Last updated: 2024-02-26Bibliographically approved
Naraghi, S., Ganzer, N., Bondemark, L. & Sonesson, M. (2021). Stability of maxillary anterior teeth after two years of retention in adolescents: a randomised controlled trial comparing two bonded and a vacuum-formed retainer. European Journal of Orthodontics, 43(2), 152-158
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Stability of maxillary anterior teeth after two years of retention in adolescents: a randomised controlled trial comparing two bonded and a vacuum-formed retainer
2021 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 43, no 2, p. 152-158Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Retention of the maxillary anterior teeth is commonly recommended to maintain the teeth in their corrected positions. Both fixed and removable retention methods are used, but the certainty of evidence is low.

Objective: To evaluate post-treatment changes in irregularity of the maxillary six anterior teeth and single tooth contact point discrepancy (CPD) of three different retention methods.

Trial design: Three-arm parallel group single-centre randomized controlled trial.

Materials and methods: Ninety patients, 54 girls and 36 boys, were recruited to the study. The inclusion criteria were adolescent patients treated with fixed appliances at least in the maxilla. After gaining informed consent from the patient and their custodians, the patients were randomized to one of three groups: bonded retainer 13–23, bonded retainer 12–22, and removable vacuum-formed retainer (VFR) covering the maxillary teeth including the second molars. The randomization, prepared by an independent person, used blocks of 30. The primary outcomes were changes in single CPD and Little’s irregularity index (LII) measured on digitalized three-dimensional study casts before and after 2-year retention. The study casts were anonymized before assessment and the changes were blinded for the assessor. Data were evaluated on an intention-to-treat basis. Thus, all randomized patients were incorporated into the final analysis.

Results: The LII and CPDs increased slightly in all three groups without any statistically significant differences between the groups. The VFR group showed a small intercanine width increase and some more changes of canine rotations than in the other groups.

Harms: No harm was observed in any subjects and none of the patients needed retreatment.

Limitations: The trial was a single-centre study and short-term changes were evaluated.

Conclusions: All three retention methods showed equally effective retention capacity and all the changes found in the three groups were small and considered clinically insignificant. Thus, the null hypothesis was confirmed. All three methods can be recommended.

Trial registration: NCT04616755

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2021
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-39498 (URN)10.1093/ejo/cjaa077 (DOI)000648939600005 ()33351886 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85104046692 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2021-01-20 Created: 2021-01-20 Last updated: 2024-02-23Bibliographically approved
Projects
Treatment of posterior crossbite - effectiveness, cost-effectivenes and quality of life; Malmö University
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications