OBJECTIVE: To survey how patients and parents rate microelectronic wear-time tracking (TheraMon(®)) during treatment with removable orthodontic appliances. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 125 patients with a mean age of 11.99 years whose treatment involved removable appliances with a built-in microsensor for wear-time documentation were enrolled in a questionnaire study addressing electronic wear-time tracking. Respondents included the patients and their parents. RESULTS: A total of 86% of the patients reported that the orthodontic appliance's comfort was unaffected by the installed sensor. A majority of respondents had a favorable impression of wear-time tracking. Printed wear-time documents from the clinician's computer were considered a "nice certificate of compliance" by 46% of patients, and 38% of them stated that they intended to improve their compliance when faced with a poor record. Indeed, 48% of parents believe that wear-time tracking can improve the therapeutic success, while 32% believe that it can reduce the duration of treatment. Around 10% of respondents felt that the sensors were unnecessary and not recommendable. CONCLUSION: These favorable ratings by patients and their parents may help future patients and users to decide for or against microelectronic wear-time tracking. Randomized studies are needed to demonstrate whether the sheer presence of a wear-time sensor stimulates compliance on its own.
OBJECTIVE: To survey how patients and parents rate microelectronic wear-time tracking (TheraMon(®)) during treatment with removable orthodontic appliances. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 125 patients with a mean age of 11.99 years whose treatment involved removable appliances with a built-in microsensor for wear-time documentation were enrolled in a questionnaire study addressing electronic wear-time tracking. Respondents included the patients and their parents. RESULTS: A total of 86% of the patients reported that the orthodontic appliance's comfort was unaffected by the installed sensor. A majority of respondents had a favorable impression of wear-time tracking. Printed wear-time documents from the clinician's computer were considered a "nice certificate of compliance" by 46% of patients, and 38% of them stated that they intended to improve their compliance when faced with a poor record. Indeed, 48% of parents believe that wear-time tracking can improve the therapeutic success, while 32% believe that it can reduce the duration of treatment. Around 10% of respondents felt that the sensors were unnecessary and not recommendable. CONCLUSION: These favorable ratings by patients and their parents may help future patients and users to decide for or against microelectronic wear-time tracking. Randomized studies are needed to demonstrate whether the sheer presence of a wear-time sensor stimulates compliance on its own.
Authors: A M Gross; F W Bishop; D Reese; T Lollis; C Janke; C Hedden; S Smith Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 1988-03 Impact factor: 2.650