View clinical trials related to Dental Malocclusion.
Filter by:Research Question While the reduction in treatment times and the patient satisfaction after periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) are well sustained in the scientific literature, there is still controversy regarding if grafting leads to i) change of the periodontal phenotype and ii) greater stability of post-orthodontic treatment outcomes, highlighting the need of controlled clinical trials. Aims of the Project The aim of this randomized clinical trial (RCT) is to compare piezocision-assisted orthodontics, concomitant to soft tissue grafting (volume-stable collagen matrix), with piezocision-assisted orthodontics, concomitant to bone grafting with a xenograft and a native collagen membrane, in orthodontic non-growing patients. The primary aim will be to determine the impact of this surgical protocol on the hard and soft tissue changes occurring on the buccal aspect of the dentition. Secondary objectives will include the assessment of the comparative impact on treatment duration, rate of tooth movements, presence of root resorption, periodontal parameters, bone level changes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between the two groups.
The aim of the study is to evaluate the most efficient product for the cleaning of Invisalign® clear aligners (Align Technology Inc., San Jose, CA, USA) through objective and subjective assessments after the use of 5 different products. For each aligner, one product is used for 2 weeks until all of them are used, therefore 5 different aligners are required for the study. A periodontal evaluation is conducted to assess variations during the time frame of the study.
A clinical study to evaluate the accuracy of computer software in predicting soft tissue profile changes in patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment
The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the reported pain intensity following placement of Orthodontic separators on healthy volunteers aged 18-49 in relation to their recorded physical activity level. Hypothesis 1: The investigators hypothesize that participants with higher daily step counts and physical activity levels will report significantly less pain intensity from orthodontic separators than their less active peers following separator placement. Null hypothesis is that participants with higher daily step counts will report the same pain intensity from orthodontic separators than their less active peers following separator placement The secondary aim is to describe the course of pain, at 24 hr intervals, over the next seven days following separator placement. Hypothesis 2: The investigators hypothesize that more physically active participants will report ratings of zero pain intensity faster (sooner) than their less active peers throughout the one week study. Secondary null hypothesis is that more physically active participants will report ratings of zero pain intensity at the same rate as their less active peers throughout the one week study.
One of major challenges in orthodontics is to inhibit relapse and ensure stability of treatment outcomes. Retention is the phase of orthodontic treatment that attempts to keep teeth in the corrected position after correction with orthodontic braces. Without retention there is a tendency for the teeth to return to their initial position (1). Retention is usually necessary to overcome the elastic recoil of the periodontal supporting fibers and to allow remodeling of the alveolar bone. The bonded orthodontic lingual retainer constructed from composite and orthodontic wires provides an esthetic and efficient system for maintained retention and has been shown to be an effective means of retaining aligned anterior teeth in the post treatment position in the long term. This has been in popular use as a method of retention since the late 1970s (2). The traditional retainers, which are still in use, are multi-strand stainless steel retainers such as Penta-one® 0.0215 (Masel Orthodontics, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The main problem with multistrand stainless steel retainers is their high rate of failure. Clinical studies indicate that 5% to 37% of mandibular retainers fail during retention in some form, either bond failure or wire breakage (3-5). Reliance Orthodontic Products, Inc. (Itasca, IL, USA) recently introduced a bonded retainer system (Ortho-Flextech™ chain). This retainer's bonding is claimed to be quick and easy by reducing chairside time and eliminating laboratory costs (6). One other recently introduced retainer is Memotain™ (CA-Digital in Mettmann, Germany). Memotain is a CAD/CAM fabricated lingual retainer made of 0.014 X 0.014-inch rectangular nickel-titanium. The wire is highly flexible and custom cut to precisely adapt to the patient's lingual tooth anatomy. According to manufacturer, Memotain offers numerous perceived advantages to traditional multistranded lingual wires, including no need for wire measuring or bending, individually optimized placement, greater accuracy of fit, tighter interproximal adaptation, less tongue irritation, better durability, and resistance to microbial colonization (6). However, randomized clinical trials are necessary to determine whether these advantages are substantiated with scientific data. A recent review by the Cochrane group concluded that to date there is insufficient evidence to single out any particular retention strategy as the preferred method: it was recommended that future studies should include true randomization, reporting of dropouts, adequate sample size calculation, and a minimum follow-up period of 3 months (8). Thus, the aims of this multicenter, randomised controlled trial are: - To compare and evaluate the effectiveness and failure rate of Penta-one multistrand, Ortho-Flextech and Memotain retainers with each other - To compare the possible complications between the three retainers over time - To establish the cost-effectiveness of the three retainers - To evaluate the effectiveness of sandblasting in the retention of the wires
Accuracy of arch analysis in mixed dentition using digital study models versus the plaster models using Tanaka and Johnston prediction equation: