Katharina Schäfer1, Björn Ludwig2, Hannes Meyer-Gutknecht3, Timm Cornelius Schott4. 1. *Department of Orthodontics and Orofacial Orthopedics, University Hospital of Dentistry, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen. 2. **Department of Orthodontics, University of Homburg/Saar, and Private Practice, Traben-Trarbach. 3. ***Department of Orthodontics, University of Aachen, Germany. 4. *Department of Orthodontics and Orofacial Orthopedics, University Hospital of Dentistry, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, timm.schott@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to quantify the wear times of removable appliances during active orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The wear times of 141 orthodontic patients treated with active removable appliances in different locations were documented over a period of 3 months using an incorporated microsensor. Gender, age, treatment location, health insurance status, and type of device were evaluated with respect to wear time. Significant associations between wear times and patient factors were calculated using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: The median daily wear time was 9.7 hours/day for the entire cohort, far less than the 15 hours/day prescribed. Younger patients wore their appliances for longer than older patients (7-9 years 12.1 hours/day, 10-12 years 9.8 hours/day, and 13-15 years 8.5 hours/day; P < 0.0001). The median wear time for females (10.6 hours/day) was 1.4 hours/day longer than males (9.3 hours/day; P = 0.017). Patients treated at different locations wore their devices with a difference of up to 5.0 hours/day. Privately insured patients had significantly longer median wear times than statutorily insured patients. No significant difference in wear time was noted according to device type. CONCLUSIONS: The daily wear time of removable appliances during the active phase of orthodontic therapy can be routinely quantified using integrated microelectronic sensors. The relationship between orthodontist and patient seems to play a key role in patient adherence. Wear-time documentation provides the basis for more individualized wear-time recommendations for patients with removable appliances. This could result in a more efficient, shorter, and less painful orthodontic therapy.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to quantify the wear times of removable appliances during active orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The wear times of 141 orthodontic patients treated with active removable appliances in different locations were documented over a period of 3 months using an incorporated microsensor. Gender, age, treatment location, health insurance status, and type of device were evaluated with respect to wear time. Significant associations between wear times and patient factors were calculated using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: The median daily wear time was 9.7 hours/day for the entire cohort, far less than the 15 hours/day prescribed. Younger patients wore their appliances for longer than older patients (7-9 years 12.1 hours/day, 10-12 years 9.8 hours/day, and 13-15 years 8.5 hours/day; P < 0.0001). The median wear time for females (10.6 hours/day) was 1.4 hours/day longer than males (9.3 hours/day; P = 0.017). Patients treated at different locations wore their devices with a difference of up to 5.0 hours/day. Privately insured patients had significantly longer median wear times than statutorily insured patients. No significant difference in wear time was noted according to device type. CONCLUSIONS: The daily wear time of removable appliances during the active phase of orthodontic therapy can be routinely quantified using integrated microelectronic sensors. The relationship between orthodontist and patient seems to play a key role in patient adherence. Wear-time documentation provides the basis for more individualized wear-time recommendations for patients with removable appliances. This could result in a more efficient, shorter, and less painful orthodontic therapy.
Authors: Samar Adel; Abbas Zaher; Nadia El Harouni; Adith Venugopal; Pratik Premjani; Nikhilesh Vaid Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 3.411