Orthodontics
Jigarsinh D. Solanki; Ajay K. Kubavat; Khyati V. Patel; Susmita Choudhary; Sanjeev Jakati; Alpesh Vaghela
Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this questionnaire study was to determine what criteria lead potential orthodontic patients to choose a direct-to-consumer aligner company, orthodontist, or general dentist in north Gujarat, India.Methods: A total of 100 potential orthodontic patients from the general population in ...
Read More
Aim: The purpose of this questionnaire study was to determine what criteria lead potential orthodontic patients to choose a direct-to-consumer aligner company, orthodontist, or general dentist in north Gujarat, India.Methods: A total of 100 potential orthodontic patients from the general population in north Gujarat participated in the study. Google Forms was used to send the questionnaire, and the data was recorded. Participants’ views on the type of provider they would prefer for their orthodontic treatment were tabulated. Data was entered in the software SPSS (v. 20.0) and statistical analysis was performed (p<0.05).Results: A total of 58 females and 42 males from the general population (100 potential orthodontic patients) in north Gujarat responded to the questionnaire. The participants (45%) held the opinion that a direct-to-consumer aligner company could offer better cost of treatment, 62% of participants preferred an orthodontist for better quality of treatment, 56% of participants preferred a direct-to-consumer aligner company because they felt that it would be more convenient, and 49% of participants preferred an orthodontist because they felt they would offer better follow-up after orthodontic treatment.Conclusion: Participants tended to prefer orthodontists because they felt they would receive better quality of treatment and follow-up, and more treatment options such as aesthetic treatment. However, they preferred direct-to-consumer aligner companies because of their convenience, lower cost, shorter treatment duration, and better customer service. For their child's orthodontic care, parents typically choose an orthodontist.
Orthodontics
Nirali Mehulbhai Shah; Khyati Viral Patel; Ajay Kubavat; Manish Desai; Harshit Arvindbhai Patel; Nikunj Harikrushn Prajapati
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the in vitro study was to examine the enamel surface after the application of four different methods for adhesive removal following the bracket debonding procedure, as well as to compare their effects on enamel surface.Methods: Premolars (n=60) were randomly assigned to four groups. After ...
Read More
Aim: The aim of the in vitro study was to examine the enamel surface after the application of four different methods for adhesive removal following the bracket debonding procedure, as well as to compare their effects on enamel surface.Methods: Premolars (n=60) were randomly assigned to four groups. After initial debonding and recording the shear bond strength (SBS), adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were assessed. The removal method for each of the four groups was the use of 1) a round bur, 2) rubber wheel bur, 3)12 fluted tungsten carbide bur, and 4) scaler. After that, teeth in all four groups were kept in artificial saliva for one month. After rebonding with a new bracket, again the SBS and ARI scores were measured. Two representative samples from each group were examined under a scanning electron microscope. ……. P-value <0.05 was considered as significant. ANOVA test was used to assess the SBS association within the group. Paired T test was used to assess the SBS between the group. fisher’s exact test was performed to compare ARI index before and after.Results: There was significant decrease in secondary SBS value in group 1 but significant increase in secondary SBS value in group 3, and a slight decrease in SBS value in group 4. In SEM images, there were composite remnants in all the four groups with fewer remnants in group 2. Enamel surface damage was observed in the SEM image of group 3. ARI scores showed no significant difference.Conclusion: Adhesive remnant removal efficiency of the round bur and scaler are less. Rubber wheel bur is a good choice of instrument for removal of adhesive remnants from tooth surface as it does not affect the bond strength. Tungsten carbide bur shows good results, as secondary bonding SBS value increased. Significant difference between ARI scores did not exist, indicating a higher number of mixed type failure in all groups.
