Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Pain intensity and discomfort following surgical placement of orthodontic anchoring units and premolar extraction: a randomized controlled trial
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9638-4648
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).
2007 (English)In: Angle orthodontist, ISSN 0003-3219, E-ISSN 1945-7103, Vol. 77, no 4, p. 578-585Article in journal (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare perceived pain intensity and discomfort between the placement of two different orthodontic anchoring units designed for osseointegration and premolar extraction in adolescent patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 adolescent patients (60 girls and 60 boys) were recruited and randomized into three groups. Group A underwent installation of an onplant, group B installation of an Orthosystem implant, and group C premolar extraction. Pain intensity and discomfort, analgesic consumption, limitations in daily activities, and functional jaw impairment were evaluated the first evening and one week after the intervention. RESULTS: Pain intensity following surgical installation of an onplant was comparable to the pain intensity experienced after premolar extraction, but there was significantly less pain after surgical installation of an Orthosystem implant compared to installation of an onplant (P = .002) or premolar extraction (P = .007). The protective, vacuum-formed stent caused great discomfort, even more discomfort than the surgical sites following installation of the onplant or the Orthosystem implant. CONCLUSION: The Orthosystem implant was better tolerated than the onplant in terms of pain intensity, discomfort, and analgesic consumption and was, therefore, the anchorage system of choice in a short-term perspective.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2007. Vol. 77, no 4, p. 578-585
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-15695DOI: 10.2319/062506-257.1ISI: 000248074900002PubMedID: 17605489Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-34447125289Local ID: 4697OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-15695DiVA, id: diva2:1419217
Available from: 2020-03-30 Created: 2020-03-30 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Orthodontic anchorage: evidence-based evaluation of anchorage capacity and patients' perceptions
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Orthodontic anchorage: evidence-based evaluation of anchorage capacity and patients' perceptions
2007 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Orthodontic anchorage is the ability to resist unwanted reciprocalforces and reinforcement of anchorage by supplementary appliances,in or outside the mouth, is often needed to obtain successful results.In the last 10 years, interest in appliances that use implants has beengrowing.Successful orthodontic treatment demands effective methods andsystematic evaluation of different treatment approaches is thereforeessential. Several studies on the efficiency of various anchorage systemshave been published, but a critical appraisal or interpretationof evidence that systematically considers validity, results, and relevancehas not been made. Analysis of treatment modalities must alsoinclude patients’ perceptions and potential side-effects.The overall aim of this thesis was to evaluate a new anchoragetechnique that incorporates osseointegration and compare it withconventional methods concerning effects on tooth movements inadolescents and their acceptance and experience of the additionalsurgical procedures that osseointegration involves. The followinganchorage systems were analyzed: Onplant system, Orthosystemimplant, headgear and transpalatal bar.This thesis was based on four studies:Paper I systematically reviewed the efficiency of orthodontic anchoragesystems and interpreted the methodological quality of theselected studies from an evidence-based perspective. The literaturesearch spanned January 1966 – December 2004 and was later extendedto July 2007.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Malmö University, Faculty of Odontology, Department of Orthodontics, 2007. p. 132
Series
Swedish Dental Journal : Supplement, ISSN 0348-6672 ; 191
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-7713 (URN)4751 (Local ID)91-7104-294-6 (ISBN)4751 (Archive number)4751 (OAI)
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-02-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

List, ThomasBondemark, Lars

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
List, ThomasBondemark, Lars
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Angle orthodontist
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 17 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf