Orthodontics
Lujain A Alsulaimani; Anwar Alhazmi; Arwa Jan; Suliman Shahin; Faisal Alghamdi; Osama Basri
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to compare the treatment progress and complications between patients receiving conventional orthodontic treatment and clear aligners during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
Methods: An electronic survey was distributed randomly among orthodontic patients in Saudi ...
Read More
Aim: This study aimed to compare the treatment progress and complications between patients receiving conventional orthodontic treatment and clear aligners during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
Methods: An electronic survey was distributed randomly among orthodontic patients in Saudi Arabia to understand how the global health crisis caused by COVID-19 affected orthodontic patients. The survey questions were structured into four sections, including demographic data, continuation of orthodontic follow-up appointments during the COVID-19, reasons for missed appointments, and problems of orthodontic patients. Data analysis consisted of simple descriptive statistics presented in frequency tables and percentages. Statistical significance was set at P≤0.05.
Results: A total of 512 electronic responses were received. Sixty-two (12.11%) participants missed no orthodontic follow-up appointment during the COVID-19 lockdown. Hence, the study included 450 (87.89%) participants to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on sustained orthodontic treatment. The proportion of patients in the fixed appliance group (35.2%, 86 patients) who responded that “they had not even once tried to communicate with their orthodontists” was significantly higher than that in the clear aligner group (9.2%, 19 patients) (P<0.001). The proportion of participants who received fixed appliances (62.3%, 152 patients) and disagreed with the lockdown of orthodontic clinics during the COVID-19 was significantly higher than that in clear aligner users (19.4%, 40 patients) (P<0.001).
Conclusion: The results indicated that most issues were reported by patients who had fixed appliances. Thus, tele-orthodontics could provide a solution to continue dental practice during the COVID-19, and clear aligners are preferable to traditional orthodontic treatment methods.
Orthodontics
Maryam Omidkhoda; Farid Shiezadeh; Seyedeh zahra Siadatifar; Erfan Bardideh; Milad Zarei
Abstract
Aim: Orthodontic treatment often leads to gingival hyperplasia, which may complicate oral hygiene and necessitate surgical interventions such as gingivectomy. This study compared the efficacy of ceramic burs versus scalpels in gingivectomy procedures for orthodontic patients, focusing on periodontal ...
Read More
Aim: Orthodontic treatment often leads to gingival hyperplasia, which may complicate oral hygiene and necessitate surgical interventions such as gingivectomy. This study compared the efficacy of ceramic burs versus scalpels in gingivectomy procedures for orthodontic patients, focusing on periodontal outcomes and pain.
Methods: This case series describes six orthodontic patients with gingival hyperplasia. The patients were between 15-25 years and were non-smokers. They underwent gingivectomy using two methods: ceramic burs (NTI® Soft Tissue Trimmers) and traditional scalpels. Preoperative oral hygiene instructions were given, and intraoral photographs were obtained. Clinical measurements included the plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and bleeding index (BI). Bleeding, pain (using a visual analog scale), and periodontal indices were assessed at several time points postoperatively.
Results: Both groups showed significant improvements in gingival hyperplasia, PI, and mean GI. However, the ceramic bur group experienced lower postoperative pain compared to the scalpel group. One patient in the scalpel group required analgesics for pain management. The results highlighted the effective management of gingival hyperplasia with both methods but with a potential advantage in pain management for the ceramic bur group.
Conclusion: This study indicated that both ceramic burs and scalpels are effective for gingivectomy in orthodontic patients. Ceramic burs might offer a less painful alternative, although both methods effectively manage gingival hyperplasia. Further studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-ups are required to confirm the present findings and potentially recommend ceramic burs as a preferred method for gingivectomy.
