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
Orthodontic anchoring techniques and its influence on pain, discomfort, and jaw function: a randomized controlled trial.
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9638-4648
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).
2012 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 34, no 1, p. 102-108Article in journal (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The aim of this trial was to evaluate and compare perceived pain, discomfort, and jaw function impairment between orthodontic treatments combined with skeletal anchorage and treatment using conventional anchorage with headgear or transpalatal bar. A total of 120 adolescent patients in order to start orthodontic treatment were consecutively recruited and randomized into three groups with different anchorage. Group A underwent installation of a skeletal anchorage (Onplant or Orthosystem implant), group B received headgear, and group C a transpalatal bar. Questionnaires were used to assess pain intensity, discomfort, analgesic consumption, and jaw function impairment from baseline to the end of treatment. Pain scores overall peaked on day 2 and were almost back to baseline on day 7. The site with the highest pain scores during treatment was incisors in contact but with no differences between groups. Pain intensity from molars was significantly less in the skeletal anchorage group A compared to the transpalatal bar group C the first 4 days in treatment and with no sign differences compared to headgear. The results confirm that there were very few significant differences between patients’ perceptions of skeletal and conventional anchorage systems during orthodontic treatment. Consequently, these new appliances were well accepted by the patients in a long time perspective and can thus be recommended.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2012. Vol. 34, no 1, p. 102-108
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-6675DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjq171ISI: 000299746200017PubMedID: 21300723Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84856436463Local ID: 13202OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-6675DiVA, id: diva2:1403625
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically 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
European Journal of Orthodontics
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 65 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