D V Trupthi1, Shouvik Chowdhury2, Anjan Shah3, Madhumati Singh3. 1. Hosmat Superspeciality Hospital, Bangalore, India. 2. Institute of Dental Sciences, Pilibhit Byepass Road, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh India. 3. Raja Rajeswari Dental College and Hospital, Bangalore, India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study was done to compare the clinical efficacy of vacuum formed splints and arch bar in treating minimally displaced mandibular fractures. METHOD: Forty patients were included in two groups. Group 1 was treated with custom made splints and group 2 with conventional arch bar. Patients were recalled on 3rd, 7th, 14th day and on the day of removal of the appliance. Periodontal status, stability of appliance and chair side time were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean chair side time taken by vacuum formed splint was 18.05 min and conventional arch bar fixation was 68.25 min. 8.3 % of patients with vacuum formed splints had poor oral hygiene in comparison with 25 % of patients with conventional arch bar. 70 % of patients with vacuum formed splints and 60 % of the patients with conventional arch bars were comfortable in mastication during treatment. CONCLUSION: Vacuum formed splints has better advantages over arch bar with respect to chair side time, periodontal health, patient's compliance of maintaining oral hygiene, mastication and speech. Vacuum formed splints avoid needle stick injuries. So, they can be used for intermaxillary fixation in minimally displaced mandibular fractures.
OBJECTIVE: The study was done to compare the clinical efficacy of vacuum formed splints and arch bar in treating minimally displaced mandibular fractures. METHOD: Forty patients were included in two groups. Group 1 was treated with custom made splints and group 2 with conventional arch bar. Patients were recalled on 3rd, 7th, 14th day and on the day of removal of the appliance. Periodontal status, stability of appliance and chair side time were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean chair side time taken by vacuum formed splint was 18.05 min and conventional arch bar fixation was 68.25 min. 8.3 % of patients with vacuum formed splints had poor oral hygiene in comparison with 25 % of patients with conventional arch bar. 70 % of patients with vacuum formed splints and 60 % of the patients with conventional arch bars were comfortable in mastication during treatment. CONCLUSION: Vacuum formed splints has better advantages over arch bar with respect to chair side time, periodontal health, patient's compliance of maintaining oral hygiene, mastication and speech. Vacuum formed splints avoid needle stick injuries. So, they can be used for intermaxillary fixation in minimally displaced mandibular fractures.
Entities:
Keywords:
Arch bars; Intermaxillary fixation; Mandibular fractures; Vacuum formed splints