File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Pain and daily oral impact and satisfaction of patients treated with labial and lingual fixed appliances

TitlePain and daily oral impact and satisfaction of patients treated with labial and lingual fixed appliances
Authors
Issue Date2009
PublisherOxford University Press
Citation
The 85th Congress of the European Orthodontic Society, Helsinki, Finland, 10 – 14 June 2009. In European Journal of Orthodontics, 2009, v. 31 n. 4, p. e25-e26 Abstract no. 61 How to Cite?
AbstractAIMS: To compare pain and daily oral impact experienced and satisfaction of patients treated with conventional labial fi xed orthodontic appliances (CLFOA) and lingual fi xed orthodontic appliances (LFOA). SUBJECTS AND METHOD: A prospective case-control longitudinal study of adult patients treated with LFOA (case group) and CLFOA (control group) over a 3-month period. Patients rated their overall pain experience and pain experienced at different orofacial locations on 100 mm visual analogue scales at three time points: 1 week and 1 and 3 months after bracket placement. In addition, an assessment of daily oral impacts and treatment satisfaction was assessed by means of a structured questionnaire. Times series analysis was conducted to compare pain, daily oral impact experienced and satisfaction over the study period between the case and control group. RESULTS: There was no signifi cant difference in global ratings of pain between the two groups over the time period (P > 0.05). However, LFOA patients reported higher ratings of tongue pain than CLFOA patients (P < 0.001) whereas CLFOA reported higher ratings of lip (P < 0.001) and cheek (P < 0.001) pain compared with LFOA over the study period. With respect to daily oral impacts, LFOA subjects reported more oral discomfort (P < 0.001), dietary changes (P < 0.001), diffi culty swallowing (P < 0.001), speech disturbances (P < 0.001) and social disturbances (P < 0.001) than CLFOA patients. There was no signifi cant difference in LFOA and CLFO ratings of satisfaction with treatment (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with CLFOA experience similar levels of overall pain as those treated with LFOA but experience pain at different orofacial sites. LFOA patients tended to experience more daily oral impacts compared with CLFOA patients. Both groups had similar levels of satisfaction with treatment.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/94761
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.44
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.090

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWu, Aen_HK
dc.contributor.authorMcGrath, CPJen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, RWKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWiechmann, Den_HK
dc.contributor.authorRabie, ABMen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-25T15:41:07Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-25T15:41:07Z-
dc.date.issued2009en_HK
dc.identifier.citationThe 85th Congress of the European Orthodontic Society, Helsinki, Finland, 10 – 14 June 2009. In European Journal of Orthodontics, 2009, v. 31 n. 4, p. e25-e26 Abstract no. 61en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0141-5387-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/94761-
dc.description.abstractAIMS: To compare pain and daily oral impact experienced and satisfaction of patients treated with conventional labial fi xed orthodontic appliances (CLFOA) and lingual fi xed orthodontic appliances (LFOA). SUBJECTS AND METHOD: A prospective case-control longitudinal study of adult patients treated with LFOA (case group) and CLFOA (control group) over a 3-month period. Patients rated their overall pain experience and pain experienced at different orofacial locations on 100 mm visual analogue scales at three time points: 1 week and 1 and 3 months after bracket placement. In addition, an assessment of daily oral impacts and treatment satisfaction was assessed by means of a structured questionnaire. Times series analysis was conducted to compare pain, daily oral impact experienced and satisfaction over the study period between the case and control group. RESULTS: There was no signifi cant difference in global ratings of pain between the two groups over the time period (P > 0.05). However, LFOA patients reported higher ratings of tongue pain than CLFOA patients (P < 0.001) whereas CLFOA reported higher ratings of lip (P < 0.001) and cheek (P < 0.001) pain compared with LFOA over the study period. With respect to daily oral impacts, LFOA subjects reported more oral discomfort (P < 0.001), dietary changes (P < 0.001), diffi culty swallowing (P < 0.001), speech disturbances (P < 0.001) and social disturbances (P < 0.001) than CLFOA patients. There was no signifi cant difference in LFOA and CLFO ratings of satisfaction with treatment (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with CLFOA experience similar levels of overall pain as those treated with LFOA but experience pain at different orofacial sites. LFOA patients tended to experience more daily oral impacts compared with CLFOA patients. Both groups had similar levels of satisfaction with treatment.-
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherOxford University Press-
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of Orthodonticsen_HK
dc.titlePain and daily oral impact and satisfaction of patients treated with labial and lingual fixed appliancesen_HK
dc.typeConference_Paperen_HK
dc.identifier.emailMcGrath, CPJ: mcgrathc@HKUCC.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWong, RWK: fyoung@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailRabie, ABM: rabie@hkusua.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityMcGrath, CPJ=rp00037en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWong, RWK=rp00038en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityRabie, ABM=rp00029en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ejo/cjp095-
dc.identifier.hkuros157566en_HK
dc.identifier.spage18en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats